The Relationship of Poker with Quantum Physics!

cese1962

cese1962

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 23, 2015
Total posts
177
Chips
0
The Relationship of Poker with Quantum Physics!

It may seem an absurd analogy at first glance, but I assure you that both ideas share several points in common. In addition, the more different two concepts are more interesting, we can relate them.

First of all, let's define the concept of quantum and what are its laws.
We will not delve into this definition, we will only go into some basic and general knowledge drawing a parallel with the dynamics of poker.

Until the beginning of the twentieth century the whole foundation of physics was shaped by the deterministic view of the universe, the fruit of the works of Isaac Newton.
Under this approach, any and all existing events are a consequence of a cause, consequently also the cause of other events.
For example, if you throw a pool ball against another on a table, it collides causing a movement in the others.
Therefore, we have the cause (firing of a ball) and the consequence (the movement provoked in the other balls).
Thinking this way, if we could measure exactly how the first ball was thrown and if we had all the necessary formulas at hand we could theoretically know in advance what the movement on the billiard balls would look like, and consequently , As the system would be configured at the end.
Now we are going to expand the idea to the ends of our existence. Imagine each atom in the cosmos as a pool ball and imagine the full extent of the universe as a table.
If we knew the configuration of these "balls" in the universal "table" at a given moment and if we had to process all this information using the appropriate formulas we could predict how the Universe would be configured at any point of its extension at any moment of time.
It would be possible to predict even the smallest details such as the color of the dress that woman will wear the day after tomorrow or whether that dog will lift the left or right paw today.
Anything could be predictable, provided you had the right information and an effective way to process it.
The impact of this current of thought struck human philosophy like a punch in the pit of the stomach. Of course, we would hardly have access to all the existing information in the Universe at any given time, we would hardly be able to find 100% correct formulas on the interaction between matter / energy, and yet we would need very fast computers to process such a large data stream.
Even so, theoretically, everything would have been determined before it even occurred, and such a scenario would be possible to exist free will?
And what would be the role of God since it could not interfere with anything at all within the system?
It turns out that in 1927 the German "Werner Heisenberg" enunciated his "Principle of Uncertainty" that would change forever the way we see the world.
According to this, any attempt to measure an elementary particle (ie of extremely small size) strikes an insurmountable barrier that prevents us from having absolutely certain the position and velocity of that particle at a given instant.
This is because the measurement of a particle is done by throwing a wave (like light) against it and seeing how that wave is changed.
In this way one can know the configuration of what is being measured, because the wave used in the measurement is, first of all, energy and thus when it reaches a given particle it changes its configuration.
The higher the accuracy desired, the higher the intensity of the tossed wave, but the higher the intensity, the greater the change in the measurement.
Therefore, we can never know for sure the position and velocity of a particle at any given instant. The higher the speed accuracy, the lower the position accuracy and vice versa.
And what are the consequences of this for our philosophy? It is scientifically proven that no matter how deterministic the Universe is, we humans will not have access to information about the particles that make up our existence. And without the data for example on "pool balls" it is impossible to make any kind of 100% accurate forecast.

Imagine that what we want to measure is any object and that for this measure to happen, we need to see this object. Therefore, there must be light beating on it and coming back to our eyes or otherwise everything will be dark and nothing can be said about it.
The problem is that when the object is too small even the light can disturb its initial state. So when we try to "see" this kind of object we actually can not really know precisely what its true state was before light hits it.

Scientists continued to try to measure the particles more, each time a new attempt was made, they appeared in a different way.
It was there that a curious fact happened: although it was impossible to predict with certainty the configuration of a particle in a given mediation, if we made several attempts and compared the results we would see that a particle "of type X" would appear, for example, 10 , 34% of the time in one point, 12.91% of the time in another, 21.76% in another, and so on.
In addition, the higher the number of measurements, the more accurately these percentages would be and regardless of where or when measurements are made, the greater the number of measurements the greater the accuracy found.
This is the true essence of the confirmation of the existence of "Quantum Physics". In this new approach to physics, the elementary particles no longer have a known configuration at a given instant (for example, having position 10 and velocity 20) and have a chance of having such a configuration (e.g., 10% chance of having position 10 And speed 20).

Nothing more can be said in the short term, only in the long run.
Has anyone noticed the resemblance to poker?

Think about me: I have "KQs", both with glasses. On the table are JT2 (being the J and T of cups). My chances of winning are very good. Several cards on the turn give me a flush, a straight or even a straight flush that would probably give me the win. There are still 2 cards remaining, I can win by doing top pair, I can win without even reaching any game. I really have everything to get this pot.
But we can never be 100% sure and bet everything in this situation. Would you bet your own life on it?
If you are an expert in the rules, it is logical that you DO NOT. And the reason for this is that, however great the chance of you winning, in a single round NOTHING CAN BE EXPECTED!
Just as in quantum physics nothing can be said about a single particle measurement so even in poker nothing can be said about the unrolling of a single round of play.
The predictions in both scenarios only begin to make sense in the long run, after several and several findings. With that it is explicit here how ridiculous is a single round of play in poker.
You know that time you had everything to win and you did not win? So, you cursed the letters, the "dealer", God and everything, did not you? For know that it meant absolutely NOTHING! Within this universe of ours (both true and poker) anything is possible. But however chaotic they may seem, there is logic behind them.
It is only necessary to know how to "see" this logic. And what would she be? LONG TERM VISION.

Both in poker and in the subatomic world, what prevails is the odds and possibilities. I say that nothing can be said at any given time and that any prediction is only sensible in the long run.
I hope these ideas can serve as a starting point for many others in each of you, both physics, existence, and the way you view and play poker.

For those who want more references on any topic addressed here, please leave a message. I'd love to hear from you.

Thank you!
Celso Segovia
International Business Consultant
Belog brasil
brazil - Porto Alegre, RS
 
PokerNuts01

PokerNuts01

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Total posts
2,275
Awards
4
Chips
0
This is interesting :)
 
B

braveslice

Pull-ups!
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Total posts
1,988
Chips
0
Enjoyable writing, well though! You could have written the same shorter though: all things in life can be described by are statistics and probabilities, so is with probability distribution too. The quantum theory itself is bit more vague though, the villain can have AA and 72 at the same time ;) There might be still room to improve your theory: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=quantum+physics
 
TheNutz4You

TheNutz4You

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Total posts
3,740
Awards
4
US
Chips
105
:motz:




:motz:

It's sad that I can read a thread/reply to a thread and without even reading the author, by the end of it I know weather it was your post or not. Everything you reply to, is done so in a negative manner. You rub me in a bad way. do you enjoy arguments and making enemies? why not just post your opinion without being a dick, or not reply at all. Do you think people want your bullshit banter in there threads? doubt it but just my opinion .:mad:
 
B

braveslice

Pull-ups!
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Total posts
1,988
Chips
0
@cese1962 I change my mind. That was good theory without buts.
 
M

mex4el

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 18, 2012
Total posts
109
Chips
0
Well, you're my friend and bent))
But it's interesting to read.
 
C

cheeeer

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 18, 2017
Total posts
984
Awards
6
Chips
81
Holy crap, did you write it yourself or just copied and pasted?

I would like to listen your opinion about radioactive uranium and poker though
 
Last edited:
Top