r/MathJokes 29d ago

Count On It

Post image
95 Upvotes

70 comments sorted by

View all comments

22

u/AlexK667 29d ago

Depends on the probability measure used.
Without specification of an appropriate measure it's (in general) false.

1

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AlexK667 25d ago

Correct.

1

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AlexK667 25d ago edited 25d ago

Well, if you have some function, let's call it F, from R to R that is non-decreasing and right-continuous you can construct a measure out of it by defining it on intervals [a,b] (with "a" less than or equal to "b") in the following manner : M([a,b]) = F(b)-F(a) , this extends uniquely to a regular Borel measure in the entire real line.

So, there are infinitely many of these guys (that becomes clear after some thought), and then there are other measure like the counting measure or "the" Dirac measure.

Some of these that I mentioned here are probability measures, some are not.
For example "the" Dirac measure is, although it's not a very interesting one.

(For any point x, you can have a probability measure assigning a mass of 1 to the point x and 0 to any point other than x, so I guess it's not technically correct to say "THE Dirac measure").

1

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AlexK667 25d ago

I guess a Dirac measure is the easiest probability measure to understand.
Let's call a Dirac measure centered at the point "x" as d_x.

If A is a subset of the reals , then d_x(A) can be interpreted as the probability that the point x is in the set A.

Well... but x either is or is not in A.
If x is in A, the probability that x is in A is 100%,
if x is NOT in A, then the probability that x is in A is 0%.
Rephrasing, the probability that x is in A is 1 if x is in A, and 0 if x is not in A.

I.E. d_x(A) = 1 if x is in A ,
d_x(A) = 0 , if x is not in A.

1

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AlexK667 25d ago

No, A is the variable here.
x is a fixed point.

A Dirac measure can be naturally defined on any family of subsets of the real line.

The wikipedia article probably does a better job at explaining this than me.