Tom Adams wrote:
> On Sep 11, 8:52 pm, James Annan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Tom Adams wrote:
>>> On Sep 11, 12:46 am, "Michael Tobis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> Yes, that's the one, thanks.
>>>> Since this isn't a public talk I won't identify the frequentist in
>>>> question, but he was uncomfortable with the very idea of assigning a
>>>> probability to an event that "either happened or didn't".
>>> (Opps!) Unconfortable with the very idea of assigning a 5/6
>>> probability to your survival while playing Russian Roulette once with
>>> a six-shooter, are you?
>> Of course a frequentist would be uncomfortable with that idea: their
>> interpretation of probability does not apply to single events, only as
>> the limiting frequency of an infinite number of "identical" experiments.
>> Even this concept is rather hard to define, since in a deterministic
>> world identical experiments should give identical results.
>>
>> (note that Michael was reporting someone else's views, not his own).
>>
>> James
>
> Seems pragmatic to interpret the Russian Roulette case as 5/6 based on
> a frequentist thought experiment. No?
I certainly think so, but I'm not sure what your point is.
James
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
