現代数学の系譜工学物理雑談古典ガロア理論も読む74

[過去ﾛｸﾞ] 現代数学の系譜工学物理雑談古典ガロア理論も読む74 (1002ﾚｽ)
上下前次1-新
通常表示 512ﾊﾞｲﾄ分割ﾚｽ栞
抽出解除ﾚｽ栞

このｽﾚｯﾄﾞは過去ﾛｸﾞ倉庫に格納されています｡
次ｽﾚ検索歴削→次ｽﾚ栞削→次ｽﾚ過去ﾛｸﾞﾒﾆｭｰ

711: 現代数学の系譜 雑談 古典ガロア理論も読む ◆e.a0E5TtKE  [] 2019/08/13(火) 23:53:47.99 ID:KPMDnjHM

>>705
>The riddle には確率のかの字も出てきませんよ？（＾＾

（>>692）【必死のパッチ】やなｗｗ（＾＾；
まず、表題が”Probabilities in a riddle involving axiom of choice”ｗ
次に、下記The Modificationが、時枝記事に相当する部分で
”I think it is ok, because the only probability measure we need is uniform probability on {0,1,…,N?1}, ”が、「おサルの確率論」だけどｗ
数学DR Pruss氏に木っ端みじんに論破されましたとさｗｗ（＾＾；
（>>78ご参照）

https://mathoverflow.net/questions/151286/probabilities-in-a-riddle-involving-axiom-of-choice
Probabilities in a riddle involving axiom of choice
asked Dec 9 '13 at 16:16
Denis
(抜粋)
The Modification: I would find the riddle even more puzzling if instead of 100 mathematicians, there was just one, who has to open the boxes he wants and then guess the content of a closed box. He can choose randomly a number i between 0 and 99, and play the role of mathematician number i.
In fact, he can first choose any bound N instead of 100, and then play the game, with only probability 1/N to be wrong.
In this context, does it make sense to say "guess the content of a box with arbitrarily high probability"?
I think it is ok, because the only probability measure we need is uniform probability on {0,1,…,N?1},
but other people argue it's not ok, because we would need to define a measure on sequences, and moreover axiom of choice messes everything up.

http://rio2016.5ch.net/test/read.cgi/math/1564659345/711

上下前次1-新書関写板覧索設栞歴

ｽﾚ情報赤ﾚｽ抽出画像ﾚｽ抽出歴の未読ｽﾚ AAｻﾑﾈｲﾙ

ぬこの手ぬこTOP 0.027s