3 ms·
I disagree that statisticians should adjust their definitions to fit common usage. I can put any probably on anything I want. That doesn’t imply those numbers
by patrick5415 7y ago
I disagree that statisticians should adjust their definitions to fit common usage.
I can put any probably on anything I want. That doesn’t imply those numbers mean anything usefu or that what I’m doing is backed by any established theory.
- kgwgk 7y agoThere are established theories of probability that have nothing to do with ergodicity. See for example: Laplace - Théorie analytique des probabilités - 1812 Keynes - A Treatise on Probability - 1921 Jeffreys - Theory of Probability - 1939 Savage - The Foundations of Statistics - 1954 de Finetti - Teoria delle Probabilità - 1970