5 ms·
While I like the style of writing very much, I don't like the pseudo-scientific take on the 'problem'. In any probability class, you will learn that you can't
by kutkloon7 10y ago
While I like the style of writing very much, I don't like the pseudo-scientific take on the 'problem'.
In any probability class, you will learn that you can't have an uniform distribution on an infinite set.
- obastani 10y agoNitpicking, but you can have a uniform distribution on the unit interval, which is infinite :). What you cannot have is a uniform distribution on an unbounded set. Edit: As pointed out, the correct assumption is not unboundedness, but having infinite measure (since then no normalization constant exists). I thought they were equivalent, but a simple counterexample is [0,1] \cup Z.
- kutkloon7 10y agoWell, I was criticising the article in a condescending way, on very similar grounds, so you make a fair point ;)
- kutkloon7 10y agoIn my defense, I was using the context of hash functions, in which the input set of the hash is discrete. You certainly can't hash any real number.
- SomeStupidPoint 10y agoIt's an interesting exercise in measure to figure out what falls apart between a uniform distribution on [0,1] and the lack of one on [0, inf]. (Adding a point at infinity to compactify the set, which makes the two intervals topologically equivalent.)
- klodolph 10y agoTo elaborate, the reason topological equivalence doesn't help here is because probability is defined in terms of measure spaces, not topological spaces.
- klodolph 10y agoMathematician here. You can't have a uniform distribution on a set with infinite measure. Unbounded sets are fine as long as they have finite measure.
- MrQuincle 10y agoA point distribution (single point) might be considered uniformly distributed. :-)
- klodolph 10y agoNot just "might", but is. It is a standard case of the discrete uniform distribution.
- inimino 10y agoWhat is an unbounded set with finite measure?
- obastani 10y agoI suppose you could take [0,1] \cup Z, and put a uniform measure on that set.
- vog 10y agoAs a somewhat extreme case, the rationals (Q) are unbounded but their measure is 0, hence finite.
- klodolph 10y agoSorry, by "finite" I also mean non-zero. You can't have a uniform distribution on a measure zero set.
- kutkloon7 10y agoYou can certainly have a uniform distribution on the set {1, 2}, which has measure zero... It seems to me that you can define a uniform distribution for finite sets of measure zero and for sets with finite measure.
- inimino 10y agoWhich aspect of the writing style appealed to you?