Concrete or abstract? Either this or that? Those questions are based in classical logic. The logic based on symbols (like language or math). Problem is, classical logic was "disproven" as a valid model of reality by Bell's theorem over 30 years ago. Enter quantum logic. If you're serious about investigating that question, start looking into coherent superposition. You're mind will, most assuredly, be blown. NOTHING is at it seems. Perhaps even the idea that you can't profit on every single trade.
Doesn't superposition theory in Quantum physics suggest that every trade is both a loser and a winner and it is only through observation that the wave function breaks down into either A or B?
aphie, First off, I don't want to pretend to be an expert. On the other hand, nobody really knows (whatever that is) for sure. Your description is the way quantum mechanics understood the situation for some time. When Bell "disproved" classical logic (he did this by an experiment that was analagous to the distributive property of logic/math and was able to show that A and (B or C) is NOT equivalent to (A and B) or (A and C)) it lead to the conclusion that the notion that something is either this or it's not this is false. Instead, there are an infinite number of "things" unto themselves between "this" and "that". This isn't like half this and half that, or any other proportions. It's a unique entity. All of this suggests, at least the possiblity, that in practical terms there is no reality. The universe is smoke and mirrors, and as such, one can manipulate it in any fashion you choose. Neat idea, hah.
Reality is what we create it to be, the observer creates the observed/observation. "Reality is what you can get away with" - R.A.W.