Share good ideas and conversation.

__Login__or__Take a Tour__!- Every so often some comparison of Bayesian and frequentist statistics comes to my attention. Today it was on a blog called Pythonic Perambulations. It's the work of amateurs. Their description on noninformative priors is simplified to the point of distortion. They insist on kludging their tools instead of fixing their model when it is clearly misspecified. They use a naive construction for 95% confidence intervals and are surprised when it fails miserably, and even use this as an argument against 95% confidence intervals.1 Normally I would shrug and move on, but it happened to catch me in a particularly grumpy mood, so here we are.

- The quantum mechanical probability is not observed but merely serves as an intermediate stage in the computation of an observable phenomenon.

and

Whoever endows ψ with more meaning than is needed for computing observable phenomena is responsible for the consequences.

Fantastic. Everyone that begins to ponder quantum mechanics should read this warning first.