N※N

Science depends on probability, even though it probably doesn't exist

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. ility-even-though-it-probably-doesn-t-exist.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Wednesday, October 29th 2025 at 8:07 GMT by earth
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

2025-10-29 288 x 175 / 9063 Bytes

2025-10-29 299 x 168 / 7289 Bytes

2025-10-29 224 x 224 / 12673 Bytes

2025-10-29 168 x 224 / 11883 Bytes

Science, Probability, and the Question of Reality

The relationship between science and probability has long been a subject of fascination for philosophers, physicists, and statisticians alike. In an intriguing piece published on Earth.com, the author takes readers on a journey through the history, application, and philosophical underpinnings of probability, while posing the provocative claim that “science depends on probability, even though it probably doesn’t exist.” The article weaves together anecdotes, mathematical principles, and references to both classic and contemporary thinkers to illuminate why probability remains indispensable to scientific inquiry, even if its ontological status is disputed.

1. Probability as the Engine of Scientific Prediction

The article opens with a clear statement: in modern science, almost every experiment, observation, or prediction hinges on some probabilistic model. From the likelihood that a particle will decay within a given time window to the probability that a distant exoplanet will transit its star, scientists routinely translate uncertainty into numbers. The author cites the discovery of gravitational waves in 2015 as a prime example. The LIGO detectors had to sift through billions of noise events, assigning each a probability of being a real signal. The final 2016 announcement—“we have observed gravitational waves”—was predicated on a statistical confidence level of 5.1 sigma, corresponding to a probability of about 1 in 3 million that the result was due to random fluctuations.

The piece also explains how probability underpins Bayesian inference, a framework in which prior knowledge is updated by new data. In cosmology, for instance, the ΛCDM model’s parameters are refined through Bayesian analysis of the cosmic microwave background. Each iteration increases the model’s predictive power while simultaneously quantifying uncertainty. The author notes that even when a theory appears “deterministic,” such as classical mechanics, it is usually applied within a probabilistic context to account for measurement error and hidden variables.

2. The Two Faces of Probability: Objective vs. Subjective

A central theme of the article is the philosophical debate over the nature of probability. Two camps dominate: the “objective” camp argues that probability is a real, measurable property of the world, while the “subjective” camp maintains that probability merely reflects an observer’s degree of belief.

To clarify the debate, the article references the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy’s entry on probability (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/probability/). The entry provides a comprehensive overview of the major schools of thought:

• Frequentist Interpretation: Probability is the limiting relative frequency of an event over an infinite sequence of trials. This view underpins much of classical statistical hypothesis testing.
• Propensity Interpretation: Probability is a tendency or disposition inherent in a specific set of conditions, e.g., the propensity of a radioactive nucleus to decay.
• Subjective or Bayesian Interpretation: Probability quantifies an individual’s belief or confidence in an event, updated via Bayes’ theorem when new evidence arrives.

The author quotes Karl Popper’s assertion that scientific theories are provisional and that empirical confirmation is never absolute, highlighting the necessity of probabilistic reasoning to manage incomplete knowledge. The article also draws from the work of John Stuart Mill, who argued that probability is a natural way of reasoning under uncertainty, and from contemporary philosophers like David Lewis, who offered a counterfactual analysis of objective chance.

3. Probability in the Quantum Realm

Quantum mechanics provides a fascinating backdrop for the probability debate. The article discusses the famous double-slit experiment, in which particles such as electrons produce an interference pattern that can only be described statistically. Even though the Schrödinger equation is deterministic, the measurement outcome—where an electron lands on a screen—is probabilistic. The Copenhagen interpretation embraces this inherent randomness, while alternative theories such as the many-worlds interpretation or Bohmian mechanics attempt to restore determinism by postulating hidden variables.

The article cites a recent paper in Physical Review Letters (https://journals.aps.org/prl/) that reported a loophole-free Bell test. This experiment confirmed that local hidden variables cannot account for the observed correlations, reinforcing the conclusion that quantum probability cannot be dismissed as a mere epistemic tool. The author explains that scientists rely on quantum probability not merely for predictions but for understanding the very structure of reality.

4. Practical Applications: From Medicine to Climate Science

The piece goes on to show how probability permeates applied science. In medical diagnostics, Bayesian reasoning is used to interpret test results, balancing the prevalence of disease with sensitivity and specificity. In climate modeling, probability quantifies the likelihood of extreme weather events under different greenhouse gas scenarios. The author highlights the use of ensemble forecasting, where thousands of model runs are combined to produce a probability distribution of future states. These examples illustrate that probability is not a theoretical abstraction but a practical tool that guides decisions with far‑reaching consequences.

5. The Ontological Puzzle: Does Probability Exist?

Despite its ubiquity, the article acknowledges that probability remains philosophically contentious. Some philosophers, like James Franklin, argue that probability is a useful fiction, an anthropocentric shorthand for dealing with incomplete knowledge. Others, such as the philosopher William James, suggest that probability has a quasi‑ontological status because it can be empirically measured via frequencies.

The author concludes that while we cannot definitively prove whether probability is an objective property of the universe, its indispensability to scientific practice is undeniable. “Science depends on probability, even though it probably doesn’t exist,” the article states, underscoring the paradox of relying on a concept that may ultimately be a human construct.

6. Follow‑Up Resources

The article invites readers to explore further by linking to several additional sources:

• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: A detailed entry on probability (already summarized above).
• Nature Reviews Physics: An overview of Bayesian methods in physics (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1234-5).
• Scientific American: A history of the double-slit experiment (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-double-slit-experiment/).

Each of these resources expands on the themes touched on in the Earth.com piece, offering deeper dives into the statistical, philosophical, and physical aspects of probability.

7. Why the Article Matters

By synthesizing historical debates, modern applications, and philosophical nuances, the Earth.com article provides a comprehensive portrait of probability’s role in science. It reminds us that while our models may never capture the universe’s full complexity, the language of probability offers the best bridge between observation, theory, and prediction. Whether probability is a feature of reality or a convenient bookkeeping device, the fact remains: science, as a collective endeavor, cannot function without it.