Re: Calculus XOR Probability
- From: David C. Ullrich <ullrich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 04:49:52 -0600
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 10:27:03 +0100, Han de Bruijn
<Han.deBruijn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tony Orlow wrote:
Han, I am not sure what this has to do with XOR, [ .. snip .. ]
We have _one_ and the same formula, with _two_ interpretations,
one in calculus and one in probability theory.
Calculus:
lim 1/n.n = 1 : n blocks with height 1 and width 1/n
n->oo
Probability:
lim n.1/n = 1 : n blocks with height 1/n and width 1
n->oo
Calculus says that the outcome is 1 , while Probability Theory says
that, instead, we must do a dirty trick like this:
lim n.1/n = lim n ( lim 1/a ) = lim 0 = 0
n->oo n->oo a->oo n->oo
Nonsense. Probability theory says no such thing.
Consequently, there is a discrepancy between Calculus and Probability.
Therefore one can accept Calculus or Probability Theory, but not both.
Hence the XOR .
Han de Bruijn
************************
David C. Ullrich
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Calculus XOR Probability
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Calculus XOR Probability
- References:
- Re: Calculus XOR Probability
- From: Han de Bruijn
- Re: Calculus XOR Probability
- Prev by Date: Reason for operator precedence
- Next by Date: Re: about continuity of lnx
- Previous by thread: Re: Calculus XOR Probability
- Next by thread: Re: Calculus XOR Probability
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading