# Re: tautology

```On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Russell Standish wrote:
> The measure of Jack Mallah is irrelevant to this situation. The
> probability of Jack Mallah seeing Joe Schmoe with a large age is
> proportional to Joe Schmoe's measure - because - Joe Schmoe is
> independent of Jack Mallah. However, Jack Mallah is clearly not
> independent of Jack Mallah, and predictions of the probability of Jack
> Mallah seeing a Jack Mallah with large age cannot be made with the
> existing assumptions of ASSA. The claim is that RSSA has the
```
That's total BS.
I'll review, although I've said it so many times, how effective
probabilities work in the ASSA.  You can take this as a definition of
ASSA, so you can NOT deny that this is how things would work if the ASSA
is true.  The only thing you could try, is to claim that the ASSA is
false.
The effective probability of an observation with characteristic
'X' is (measure of observations with 'X') / (total measure).
The conditional effective probability that an observation has
characteristic Y, given that it has characteristic X, is
p(Y|X) = (measure of observations with X and with Y) / (measure with X).
OK, these definitions are true in general.  Let's apply them to
the situation in question.
'X' = being Jack Mallah and seeing an age for Joe Shmoe and for
Jack Mallah, and seeing that Joe also sees both ages and sees that Jack
sees both ages.
Suppose that objectively (e.g. to a 3rd party) Jack and Joe have
their ages drawn from the same type of distribution.  (i.e. they are the
same species).
Case 1: 'Y1' = the age seen for Joe is large.
Case 2: 'Y2' = the age seen for Jack is large.
Clearly P(Y1|X) = P(Y2|X).

- - - - - - -
Jacques Mallah ([EMAIL PROTECTED])