Probability, Information, Redundancy, Entropy (Campbell & Wilden)

[MrParanormalist]

So in short, you are describing the new essentialism taking hold in the sciences, right? The idea that telos in the Aristotlian-Thomistic sense inheres in agency is, as you undoubtedly are aware, making a come-back and that is what this video brought to my mind.

[threeofwands]

@Professoranton

Okay, so I was about to say something like, "it is not raining", is a product of the imagination, and should be dealt with accordingly.

But then I thought about the case, "we are not being fed". This is a plus cognitive fact. And in truth animals try to communicate this negative fact to their mothers at all times with the appropriate animal behavior.

So I would say these negative facts goes to what has the ability to listen, and may often go unanswered.

[HeliumXenonKrypton]

- wow - deep stuff !! All new ideas to me ... thanks for sharing this vid.

[wholethinker]

About this coin: each try is independent. The probability of an independent event does not depend on the previous one. That is, 50% to get head, no matter how many times in a row it was before.

And of course, for a big number of tries we'll have the frequency close to 50%.

[BillofRightsBrutus]

50/50 always. I've argued with people about it for hours. It's superstition; it's religion; it's subjectivity; it's nurture that guides elsewhere. It's self-perpetuating as well; truth, fact, or probability being the only means to break the self-perpetuating chain of reasoning. Otherwise, the knowledge based on false justification simply continues. I liked the open versus closed system analysis. Isn't every system, given what science has demonstrated, at least semi-open or semi-permeable?

[shrodingersman]

I'm going to have a look at these two books, thank you

[xknowledgeisfreex]

Here is another interesting probability problem:

There are three doors. Behind one of those doors is a prize and behind the other two are goats.

So the probability to pick the door with the prize is 1/3.

Say you've picked a door. Now one of the other two doors opens and reveals a goat.

There are now only 2 closed doors left. If you had started with these 2 doors, then the chance had been 1/2, but since you know what happened before, the chance to get the prize if you switch is 2/3, not 1/2.

[xknowledgeisfreex]

@xknowledgeisfreex

This example shows how probability depends on information.

[CoolCrazyAtheist]

Thanks for this video Professor

[threeofwands]

The probability example you give in regards to coin flips is usually described as independent events. That's why each toss has a 50/50 chance no matter what has come before - each toss is independent of every other.

The subject-object brouhaha - I thought it was now more or less established that's due to the effect of grammar on psychology. The grammar reflects that there are a multitude of objects, but when any give item uses the language it appears to that item that is the subject.

[threeofwands]

@threeofwands

that "it" is the subject.

[egoistorms]

Timothy Morton, "Melancholy Objects"

at the internetarchive

[treegraph]

Another video I much enjoyed much. There are many things in infomation theory I find very intriguing. Physicist here again, btw. and when you talk physics or math I can never help but make some recommendations. But this time, they are much more light hearted: Firstly, there is this guy on youtube, who promotes math by math problems and he actually did what you're taling about in this video watch?v=rwvIGNXY21Y. I think my favorite of his videos is watch?v=dAyDi1aa40E. similar: watch?v=heKK95DAKms

[treegraph]

@treegraph The other is a challenge I use to demonstrate the value of information theory and Shannon entropy: You have a print of the mona lisa = 300*1000 enumerated pixels and you want to sent the picture to a friend via bits, i.e. using 0 and 1, sending one bit per second. If the picture is black/white you use 0 for black pixel and 1 for white pixel (you need 300.000 signals). Now say the pic is 50%white, 25%black, 12.5%light gray and 12.5dark gray. How to sent the information effectively now?

[treegraph]

@treegraph Oh, and regarding the knowledge thing, I find it funny that the "sleeping beauty problem" is such a much discussed question.

[zarkoff45]

In a deterministic universe, probability would be a function of ignorance.

[9macrina9]

Until one can spot the bifurcation, perhaps it can't be playfully used as a metaphor and when it isn't noticed (b/c of the hypnotic Kantian ambient paradigm) it is reinscribed, or never uninscribed:-)....I do regret my parody-on-reductionism comment to Fred's free will vid. will Fred forgive when he finds out there's no life after reductionism to probability? Good vid, Corey

[Dummweltschutz]

"Probability and the field of probability - the mathematical field of probability and how probabilities play out in sience - is probably the most important realm to get at [...]" that sentence made me smile ^^

[DrDissent]

Probability has nothing to do with information or your capacity to interpret it. The probability of two rocks colliding someplace in space remains the same irregardless of you or the rocks capacity to "know something" or any perceived ability to use an imaginary set of concepts (ie mathematics) to make predictions.

[xknowledgeisfreex]

@DrDissent

Yes it has. See my example above, aka as "monty hall problem".

[DrDissent]

@xknowledgeisfreex Probability has nothing to do with you or anything else interpreting the information. All you have done is change the scenario, which makes the possible outcomes different, but that IS NOT dependent upon you knowing it. 

[xknowledgeisfreex]

@DrDissent

Well, what probability measure you use to model the situation is dependent on the information you have. Once you have that abstract mathematical model, then of course the probability is only dependent on this model, but in order to get to the model you need to take into account information.

[DrDissent]

@xknowledgeisfreex The probability of a rock falling into one of two holes is the same weather or not you or anything else has knowledge of it. The situation simply is and requires no understanding or interpretation.

[xknowledgeisfreex]

@DrDissent

There is no such thing as "the" probability of a rock falling into one of two holes.

It is all dependent on the probability space, that you use to model the specific situation and when you say the probability of X is p, then you are always talking about your model and never about reality.

[DrDissent]

@xknowledgeisfreex No probability exists just like gravity... as a phenomena independent of interpretation. I'll probably make a video response, people seem to think the observer is somehow intermingled with the outcome.

[ThePeaceableKingdom]

The relation of probability and knowledge is curious...

If I choose a card. (No magic trick, just the maths.) You have 1 chance in 52 of guessing it. But I have a 100% chance of naming it, though we describe the same event - which card I hold in my hand. But, I simultaneously have 1 in 52 of guessing your call, though you can know exactly what your guess is (First, the 6 of Hearts!)...

Which one of us faced a random event?

.

The Rules Are No Game sounds fascinating...

[DrDissent]

@ThePeaceableKingdom Sorry you have the same chance (1/52) of naming the card before they touch it. You aren't describing the same event unless you are both the same person.

[ThePeaceableKingdom]

@DrDissent "you have the same chance (1/52) of naming the card before they touch it"

But I've seen it. I chose it. Because of that, I have knowledge of what the card is, while the other player doesn't. Of course my chances of naming it are better! From my POV it's not random, it's known; from his POV, probability is the best approximation he can assume...

.

P.S. The card was "The Fool." Stupid me! I forgot to remove the major arcana! Sorry about that! ;-)

[DrDissent]

@ThePeaceableKingdom I misunderstood your scenario. I don't accept the notion that chance exists. Everything appears to be following a set of interrelated (likely universal) rules. Probability is a concept invented to fill in the gaps where the precise variables leading to an outcome are unknown.

[ThePeaceableKingdom]

@DrDissent Our views are very similar, I think. I'm highly skeptical that anything can be demonstrated to be truly random. (Though I'm hesitant to declare that therefore nothing is random.)

Probability is better thought of as "reasoning well in certain cases where the complete information is unknown," or as you put it, filling "in the gaps where the precise variables leading to an outcome are unknown."

[DrDissent]

@ThePeaceableKingdom I think you and I are on the same page. The mistake was my misreading of your scenario. I jumped to the conclusion it was the classic "pick a card any card" scenario in which you couldn't know anything until the person came up and touched the card.

[ThePeaceableKingdom]

The negative entropy stuff is very reminiscent of Schrodinger's fertile idea, "What is Life?," a thin and very readable book...

[erdal0]

definately going to check out those books! this is so interesting.

[ThePeaceableKingdom]

Your coin has a shady past. It's been unfaithful.

You see, before you flipped it the first time, it had already been flipped before. It - and coins like it - turning over mindlessly in cash registers daily... Considered as a whole there is only one all inclusive sequence of coin flips from ancient Lydia till today.

It's just that (in the only sequence there is) 10-head sequences are unpredictably distributed; like the sequence of prime numbers...

Though I question if unpredictable = random.

[nargargole]

What if 60 seconds was multiplied by 300 million years [life on earth] - and how would this relate to genetic mutation and species evolution?

I think all Presidents should watch this video.

[ParkwayDriveHorizons]

I thought you were going to recommend Dr. Tom Campbells "My Big Toe" on the very subjects of systems, sub systems, entropy, causality and probability. Whats the probability of 2 Campbells writing about their experience and observations on the very same topic? lol

[2bsirius]

Both books look worth finding and reading. The first one I can probably get. It was published in 1973. Old books, especially those from the US are problematic. The second will likely take longer and will have to be shipped from America.

Context theory sounds intriguing. There is a bit Wilden's thinking on it from online sources. I guess I could explore those while I wait for the full text to be delivered.

[xOnimpulsex]

I love you. lol

[MsMrNoface]

Enjoyed your video.