Sometimes size does not matter

DOI10.1007/S10701-022-00650-1MaRDI QIDQ2103363zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Authors Daniel Andrés Díaz-Pachón, Ola G. Hössjer, Robert J. II. Marks

Publication date 13 December 2022

Published in Foundations of Physics (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.11780

zbMATH Keywords

Bayesian statisticsemergencemaximum entropyfine-tuningfundamental constantsconstants of naturestandard modelsinfinitesweak anthropic principle

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Bayesian inference (62F15) Measures of information, entropy (94A17) Relativistic cosmology (83F05) Foundations of equilibrium statistical mechanics (82B03)

Abstract: Cosmological fine-tuning has traditionally been associated with the narrowness of the intervals in which the parameters of the physical models must be located to make life possible. A more thorough approach focuses on the probability of the interval, not on its size. Most attempts to measure the probability of the life-permitting interval for a given parameter rely on a Bayesian statistical approach for which the prior distribution of the parameter is uniform. However, the parameters in these models often take values in spaces of infinite size, so that a uniformity assumption is not possible. This is known as the normalization problem. This paper explains a framework to measure tuning that, among others, deals with normalization, assuming that the prior distribution belongs to a class of maximum entropy (maxent) distributions. By analyzing an upper bound of the tuning probability for this class of distributions the method solves the so-called weak anthropic principle, and offer a solution, at least in this context, to the well-known lack of invariance of maxent distributions. The implication of this approach is that, since all mathematical models need parameters, tuning is not only a question of natural science, but also a problem of mathematical modeling. Cosmological tuning is thus a particular instantiation of a more general scenario. Therefore, whenever a mathematical model is used to describe nature, not only in physics but in all of science, tuning is present. And the question of whether the tuning is fine or coarse for a given parameter -- if the interval in which the parameter is located has low or high probability, respectively -- depends crucially not only on the interval but also on the assumed class of prior distributions. Novel upper bounds for tuning probabilities are presented.

Recommendations

• Is cosmological tuning fine or coarse?
• Fine-tuning in the context of Bayesian theory testing
• Finely tuned models sacrifice explanatory depth
• A probability measure for FLRW models
• Revisiting prior distributions. II: Implications of the physical prior in maximum entropy analysis

Cites work

• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 46732 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1354815 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1462093 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1865733 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 765034 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3249395 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3349081 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3200657 (Why is no real title available?)
• A probability path
• Brownian motion. With an appendix by Oded Schramm and Wendelin Werner
• Entropy and the central limit theorem
• Fine-tuning in the context of Bayesian theory testing
• Foundations of the theory of probability. Translated from the German and edited by Nathan Morrison. With an added bibliography by A. T. Bharucha-Reid
• Information Theory and Statistical Mechanics
• Is cosmological tuning fine or coarse?
• Maximum entropy autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity model
• New approaches to Bayesian consistency
• Philosophical lectures on probability. Collected, edited, and annotated by Alberto Mura. With an introductory essay by Maria Carla Galavotti. Transl. by Hykel Hosni
• Prior Probabilities
• Probability Theory
• Problems with the argument from fine tuning
• Solution of Shannon’s problem on the monotonicity of entropy
• Two-dimensional random walk. From path counting to random interlacements
• Uniform probability
• Using statistical methods to model the fine-tuning of molecular machines and systems
• Who Gave You the Epsilon? Cauchy and the Origins of Rigorous Calculus

Cited in

(8)

• Almost Sufficiently Large
• Finely tuned models sacrifice explanatory depth
• The tail does not determine the size of the giant
• On the size of a rumour
• Correcting prevalence estimation for biased sampling with testing errors
• Is cosmological tuning fine or coarse?
• Size matters!
• A note for the SNIEP in size 5

This page was built for publication: Sometimes size does not matter

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q2103363)