Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Simulation
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
The two envelopes paradox in non-Bayesian and Bayesian statistics
arXiv
Authors: Shiro Ishikawa
Year
2014
Paper ID
47965
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
134
Citations
N/A
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to clarify the (non-Bayesian and Bayesian) two-envelope problems in terms of quantum language (or, measurement theory), which was recently proposed as a linguistic turn of quantum mechanics (with the Copenhagen interpretation). The two envelopes paradox is only a kind of high school student's probability puzzle, and it may be exaggerated to say that this is an unsolved problem. However, since we are convinced that quantum language is just statistics of the future, we believe that there is no clear answer without the description by quantum language. In this sense, the readers are to find that quantum language provides the final answer (i.e., the easiest and deepest understanding) to the two envelope-problems in both non-Bayesian and Bayesian statistics. Also, we add the discussion about St. Petersburg two-envelope paradox.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2014 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- The purpose of this paper is to clarify the (non-Bayesian and Bayesian) two-envelope problems in terms of quantum language (or, measurement theory), which was recently proposed...
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.