Khrennikov Andrei
International Center for Mathematical Modeling in Physics and Cognitive Sciences, Linnaeus University, SE-351 95 Växjö, Sweden.
Entropy (Basel). 2022 Nov 2;24(11):1592. doi: 10.3390/e24111592.
This note is devoted to the problem of signaling (marginal inconsistency) in the Bell-type experiments with physical and cognitive systems. It seems that in quantum physics, this problem is still not taken seriously. Only recently have experimenters started to check the signaling hypothesis for their data. For cognitive systems, signaling was statistically significant in all experiments (typically for decision making) performed up to today. Here, one cannot simply ignore this problem. Since signaling contradicts the quantum theory of measurement for compatible observables, its statistical significance in experiments with humans can be considered as an objection for quantum-like modeling-applications of quantum theory to cognition, decision making, psychology, economics and finance, social and political science. In this paper, we point to two possible sources of signaling generation that are consistent with quantum measurement theory. Thus, the signaling objection for quantum-like modeling is not catastrophic. One of these sources is the direct physical signaling about selection of experimental settings, questions or tasks in quantum-like studies. Another possible source is a state modification dependent on experimental settings. The latter was a rather common source of signaling in quantum physics. Since the physical size of the brain is very small comparing with the light velocity, it seems to be impossible to prevent the direct physical signaling (with electromagnetic waves) between the brain's areas processing two questions and b. However, if, for these questions, not the electromagnetic waves, but electrochemical communication plays the crucial role, the experimenter may hope to make signaling weaker by answering the questions faster. The problem of question-dependent mental state modification seems to be solvable via smarter experimental design. This paper can be useful both for physicists interested in quantum foundations and for researchers working in quantum-like studies, e.g., applying the quantum theory to model decision making or psychological effects. This paper is solely about quantum theory. Thus, we do not consider general contextual probabilistic models.
本笔记致力于探讨在涉及物理和认知系统的贝尔型实验中的信号传递问题（边际不一致性）。在量子物理学中，这个问题似乎仍未得到足够重视。直到最近，实验者才开始针对他们的数据检验信号传递假设。对于认知系统而言，在迄今为止所进行的所有实验（通常是关于决策）中，信号传递在统计上都是显著的。在此，人们不能简单地忽视这个问题。由于信号传递与兼容可观测量的量子测量理论相矛盾，其在人类实验中的统计显著性可被视为对量子理论在认知、决策、心理学、经济学和金融、社会和政治科学等领域类量子建模应用的一种质疑。在本文中，我们指出了与量子测量理论一致的两个可能产生信号传递的来源。因此，针对类量子建模的信号传递质疑并非是灾难性的。其中一个来源是在类量子研究中关于实验设置、问题或任务选择的直接物理信号传递。另一个可能的来源是依赖于实验设置的状态修改。后者在量子物理学中是相当常见的信号传递来源。由于大脑的物理尺寸与光速相比非常小，似乎不可能阻止大脑中处理两个问题a和b的区域之间通过电磁波进行直接物理信号传递。然而，如果对于这些问题，起关键作用的不是电磁波，而是电化学通信，那么实验者可能希望通过更快地回答问题来使信号传递减弱。依赖于问题的心理状态修改问题似乎可以通过更巧妙的实验设计来解决。本文对于对量子基础感兴趣的物理学家以及从事类量子研究的人员（例如将量子理论应用于决策或心理效应建模的人员）可能会有所帮助。本文仅涉及量子理论。因此，我们不考虑一般的情境概率模型。
