HackerPapers

arXiv:1810.13401quant-ph

FAQBism

John B. DeBrota, Blake C. Stacey

Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.

Abstract

We answer several questions that have been Frequently Asked about QBism. These remarks (many of them lighthearted) should be considered supplements to more systematic treatments by the authors and others.

arXiv comments
40 pages; 24 (Q,A) ordered pairs
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
quant-phQuantum Physics physics.hist-phHistory and Philosophy of Physics

On Hacker News

Linked by 1 identifiable commenter in 2 comments across 1 thread, from Sep 2021 to Sep 2021.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments1 thread

    • (pro QBist physicist here). Just some clarifications on the interesting points you raise. 1. In practice, experimental physicists can and do disagree all the time about what their apparatuses are doing, what the results mean, and so on -- at least, they do at the beginning of…

      cosmophanyView on HNParent context

    • A reference is points 17 and 18 in [https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.13401] Long story short, QBism inherits "agent" from Bayesian decision theory. In that context, we talk about gamblers making bets on the outcomes of dice rolls. In QBism, we talk about scientists making bets on the…

      cosmophanyView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.