A -> B. Does a logical statement imply that A physically cause B?
Answer
This example shows also that the major premise, ‘if A then B’ expresses B only as a logical consequence of A; and not necessarily a causal physical consequence, which could be effective only at a later time.
The rain at 10 am is not the physical cause of the clouds at 9:45 am. Nevertheless, the proper logical connection is not in the uncertain causal direction (clouds =⇒ rain), but rather (rain =⇒ clouds), which is certain, although noncausal
Tags
#chapter-1 #jaynes_probability_theory
Question
A -> B. Does a logical statement imply that A physically cause B?
Answer
?
Tags
#chapter-1 #jaynes_probability_theory
Question
A -> B. Does a logical statement imply that A physically cause B?
Answer
This example shows also that the major premise, ‘if A then B’ expresses B only as a logical consequence of A; and not necessarily a causal physical consequence, which could be effective only at a later time.
The rain at 10 am is not the physical cause of the clouds at 9:45 am. Nevertheless, the proper logical connection is not in the uncertain causal direction (clouds =⇒ rain), but rather (rain =⇒ clouds), which is certain, although noncausal
If you want to change selection, open document below and click on "Move attachment"
pdf
owner: reshreshus - (no access) - JaynesProbabilityTheory.pdf, p4
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.