To Properly Reflect Physicists’ Reasoning about Randomness, We Also Need a Maxitive (Possibility
| Venue: | Measure”, Proc. FUZZIEEE’2005 |
| Citations: | 3 - 2 self |
BibTeX
@INPROCEEDINGS{Finkelstein_toproperly,
author = {Andrei M. Finkelstein and Olga Kosheleva and Tanja Magoc and Erik Madrid and Scott A. Starks and Julio Urenda},
title = {To Properly Reflect Physicists’ Reasoning about Randomness, We Also Need a Maxitive (Possibility},
booktitle = {Measure”, Proc. FUZZIEEE’2005},
year = {},
pages = {84--108}
}
Bookmark
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
OpenURL
Abstract
According to the traditional probability theory, events with a positive but very small probability can occur (although very rarely). For example, from the purely mathematical viewpoint, it is possible that the thermal motion of all the molecules in a coffee cup goes in the same direction, so this cup will start lifting up. In contrast, physicists believe that events with extremely small probability cannot occur. In this paper, we show that to get a consistent formalization of this belief, we need, in addition to the original probability measure, to also consider a maxitive (possibility) measure. We also show that the resulting advanced and somewhat difficult-to-described definition can be actually viewed as a particular case of something very natural: the general notion of boundedness. c ○ 2007 World Academic Press, UK. All rights reserved. 1
