Re: does sqrt(2) exist in CM?

From: David C. Ullrich (ullrich_at_math.okstate.edu)
Date: 02/08/05 

Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 17:30:46 -0600

On 7 Feb 2005 11:47:59 -0800, examachine@gmail.com wrote:

>
>tchow@lsa.umich.edu wrote:
>> In article <1107787399.948658.246920@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
>> Now, it's not an accident that the same word "random" is used for
>these
>> two different meanings. They are related. As you say, Martin-Loef's
>> definition uses concepts from measure theory and statistics, which
>are
>> of course related to probability theory. And you're also right that
>> a random variable X that is uniformly distributed on [0,1] will take
>> on a noncomputable value with probability 1.
>
>No, it's no accident. What does it mean for something to occur with
>probability 1? That it's certain.

Oh my gosh. It's simply incredible, the way you're able to be
patronizing about things that you simply know nothing about.
Here referring to your advise to me and a few others a little
while ago that we should learn some probability theory.

No, probability one does not mean certainty.

>By "random real", I was referring to a random variable X that is
>uniformly distributed on (0,1) as you said. If that was unclear, I
>apologize. Our randomly choosing infinitisimal pin can never pick a
>real that is computable, that is right,

No, that is simply not right. There is no difference between the
reals it can pick and the reals it cannot pick - if it can never
pick a computable real then it can never pick any real at all.

>and that is all the information
>I wanted to convey in response to another poster, and nothing more.

And this "information" is simply wrong.

>Regards,

************************

David C. Ullrich

Relevant Pages

  • Re: does sqrt(2) exist in CM?
    ... (I replied with a simple proof that yes, the probability is 1. ... simply does _not_ distinguish some reals from other ... >randomness in probability theory and information theory are different! ... >Having made a mistake is not important if you can correct them later. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: The danger of classical hypothesis and significance tests [was Re: MADLY AMUSED]
    ... There is no measurement device or process that can literally yield a real number as a report -- in a finite life, nobody has the time to give, let alone wait, for such a report, since the precise specification of a point in a real line, via the labeling scheme known as the reals, requires an unending series of digits in general. ... any measurement theory that posits a real number as the outcome of a measurement is ab initio bound to fail in a strict sense. ... Therefore, it is my contention that when there is an uncertainty about the value of a probability model parameter, the probability statements that derive from such a model must also be uncertain, and a fortiori cannot be rendered using real numbers correct to an infinite number of decimal places. ... The short of it is roughly as above, and the resolution rests on distinguishing at least two kinds of uncertainty -- probabilistic on the one hand pertaining to occurrence uncertainty over some extension set of some presumed model of a phenomenon, and fuzzy or possibilistic or likelihood on the other, pertaining to measurement uncertainty in general, including the measurement of probability model parameters in effect through sampling. ...
    (sci.stat.math)
  • Re: Rational numbers, irrational numbers: each dense in real numbers
    ... that it is extremely unlikely to have the sequence ... even in principle to determine whether an infinite sequence of coin ... the computable reals. ... Such a probability distribution, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: does sqrt(2) exist in CM?
    ... >>Chaitin randomness. ... > of course related to probability theory. ... falsehood on the uncomputability of random reals. ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: does sqrt(2) exist in CM?
    ... >>Chaitin randomness. ... > of course related to probability theory. ... falsehood on the uncomputability of random reals. ...
    (sci.math)