QUANTUM GAME THEORY
Game theory is a branch of mathematics and strategic modelling that analyses how rational participants (players) make decisions when the outcome depends on the actions of others. It acts as the “science of strategy,” predicting behaviours in competitive situations across economics, psychology, and business. It identifies optimal strategies where no player can benefit by changing their action alone.
Key Concepts of Game Theory:
- Players: The decision-makers, such as individuals, companies, or nations.
- Strategies: The complete set of actions available to a player.
- Payoffs: The rewards or penalties (e.g., profit, utility) resulting from a specific combination of strategies.
- Nash Equilibrium: A stable state where no player has an incentive to deviate from their chosen strategy after considering an opponent’s choice.
- Dominant Strategy: A strategy that is better for a player than any other, regardless of what the other player does.
Types of Games:
- Zero-Sum vs. Non-Zero-Sum: In zero-sum games, one player’s gain is exactly equal to the other’s loss. In non-zero-sum games, players can win together or lose together.
- Cooperative vs. Non-Cooperative: Whether players can negotiate binding contracts (cooperative) or must act independently (non-cooperative).
- Simultaneous vs. Sequential: Whether players act at the same time or in turn
Real-World Applications:
Game theory is used to model competitive situations, such as price wars between firms, auction bidding, diplomatic negotiations, and environmental treaties.
The Nash Equilibrium
You have 3 options to get from one continent to another one across a sea.
Option 01
Journey time 2 days:
Depart location A, take a car, then train, then boat then train then car to get to destination B?
Option 02.
Journey time 1 day:
Depart location A, take a boat, then a train and then a coach to your destination B?
Option 03
Journey time 4 hours:
Resort location A, take an airplane and land at destination B?
The choice you most likely make is the last option choice, because it’s the most convenient and easiest route. This is an example of the Nash equilibrium. It’s where you trade off against your other options and most people take the easiest route.
It’s also based upon the options you have when interacting with other people or systems. So the options are:
- You win, they lose.
- They win, you lose.
- Nobody wins – lose, lose.
- Everyone wins – Win, win.
Of course, the term “win” and “lose” are relative to the aims and objectives, but also the psychology of each player or players. A win could be a psychological victory and so not necessarily a combat scenario but can include combat situations too.
Quantum Physics
The 4-option end of game formula also applies to quantum physics because you have a similar set of guiding options.
There is the Positive
There is the Negative
There is the Neutral
Which then provides you with 3 options initially but then opens up more than just 3 options. Also bearing in mind that you as the creator and observer have power over the neutral which governs both positive and negative equally.
This then allows for the following:
⁃ Neutral Positive
⁃ Neutral Negative
⁃ Neutral Neutral (neither positive nor negative included)
So, you can respond with a neutral that has positive consequences.
Or you can respond with a neutral that has negative consequences, for example.
Not only that, but one is able to see a positive or a negative aspect to any given thing or person, as being the neutral observer of positive and negative potentials.
The Neutral Observer
So just as in quantum entanglement and quantum physics you are the observer as neutral and depending on how you observe will depend on whether something is more positive or neutral to you or from you to others.
Most people are not aware of themselves being the third neutral observer in the middle of both positive and negative and tend to be a pin sliding on the scale of just positive and negative only. They are not aware of their neutral point of perspective being the influence point making something more positive or negative as they do not see it is them that is the valuer of whatever they perceive. They can only see something as a good or a bad thing and never as having aspects of both to it. Where they are the observer and arbitrator of something and its value positively or negatively to them. All of nature is neutral. When you water your garden it doesn’t just choose to feed only the flowers, it feeds the weeds too. So you are that third neutral space that then decides there are only 2 options for you when there are always 3. And YOU being that filter of both but also controlling both. A neutral space gives you the option to not entangle in either the positive or negative sides.
You are the:
⁃ Creator
⁃ Observer
⁃ Receiver
So in that place of superposition, of you being all of the three existing states, you can choose to place your awareness or choose to become conscious of each of those three aspects. Often, we will create a situation based on how we react to something. The situation created by our own reactions and responses then generates a consequence that we also become aware of. Yet many who are in a binary mindset will not see their own participation in the unfolding event from their reactions or responses.
So, in effect you are taught to think there is only good and evil, positive and negative, you have not been taught that there is always a 3rd option for you, the neutral space between positive and negative.
The neutral space governs both positive and negative but also can stand alone as a place that excuses both negative and positive choices, you can observe both extremes but not be entangled into them in the neutral space.
The issue I have with just “Game Theory” on its own is “who” gets to decide:
- What a “win” is?
- What a “lose” is?
- Who gets to decide the above winner/s or lower/s?
It is not a simple case of the “winner” having stopped the other opponent/s or player/s, because it could be the “win” or “lost” narrative is just another game “tactic” to deceive the other side/s.
Take for example WW2, where the Nazi’s won the war and as part of their victory over the opponents, they just moved their base of operations to South America and Base 211 in Antarctica. From there they defeated admiral Byrd’s armada and infiltrated governments along with superior antigravity and energy weapon technologies. So the tactic of making the world believe they had lost by using the propaganda of the opposition to control the populations of many infiltrated governments around the planet. So my point is that in arguments with people who are not very intelligent, you can let them walk away thinking that they have gained a win or a victory and in fact it is you who have played them, because it means that you are no longer debating the subject with a stupid person.
So this means that a win is not necessarily a win and a loss is not necessarily a loss. It’s the perception of the players that make it what it is, and arguably the true winner is the one that achieves their own objectives.
Which may be to fool others into a false victory, or a false loss. This is the quantum aspect to Game Theory that does not allow for the deception of false perception.
So, Game Theory gives you 4 options, you win or lose, everyone wins or loses, but these 4 outcomes are based on a collective agreement that those are the final outcomes.
You as an individual have 3 options, to agree to something, either for or against your will. To disagree with something for or against your will, or to neither agree or disagree. To say yes or no, but also not agree or disagree either.
So a “Win” or a “Lose” is only if you agree to them. You can choose to see neither a win nor a loss too.
So, in quantum Game Theory, you are all 3 states at the same time. It is only your own agreement and response that makes the outcome a “win” or “lose” situation with others and arguably stepping away from conflict where the combatants think they have won against you is a win for you, because they are no longer in conflict with you. It’s a question of how something is perceived by the perceiver in their subjective reality that makes it what it is. And not necessarily the same as what it was at the time.
💖🙏🌟