Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:30:34 UTC No. 16259242

>>16259236
infinitesimals =/= 0
You sound like the retards that claim .999...=1 when you say that the chance is 0

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:37:07 UTC No. 16259250

>>16259236
>how
>random
Choose one. Randomness is the opposite of methodological.
>b...but my middle school math book about randomly selecting marbles
No. The entire set of marbles does not even exist within or without space-time.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:55:12 UTC No. 16259267

>>16259250
I have a set of infinity 1s I pick 1
whoa

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:57:24 UTC No. 16259270

>>16259242
>>16259267
so what if I want to pick a random rational number from 0 to 1
what is the chance that I pick 1/2?

>>16259250
hi, i would like actual answers from real mathfags, not schizo "i'm smarter than you without trying" fags like you. thanks

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:58:00 UTC No. 16259272

The probability of picking a specific real number between 0 and 1 is not 0 but in fact 1/(aleph1). Because the sum of all possible probabilities must be 1 and 0*aleph1 is 0, that means that the probability is infinitesimal rather than being 0.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:02:31 UTC No. 16259279

>>16259270
>what is the chance that I pick 1/2?
Pretty high since while you WANT TO pick at random you are incapable of actually doing so and 1/2 is a pretty obvious choice so maybe about 1/3 chance that it is your "random" pick
Also, only a finite amount of rational numbers can be represented or conceived of within a finite universe during a finite amount of time so the very concept of picking a random from an infinite set of uniques is only applicable to thought experiments (wherein the probability is 1/infinity and the infinity in question is equal to the total number of rations in the set; keep in mind not all infinities are equal; if you truly want to know more then research hyperreals and read Keisler's Infinitesimal Approach)

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 05:28:39 UTC No. 16259326

>>16259272
pseud

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 05:29:17 UTC No. 16259327

>>16259279
>hi, i would like actual answers from real mathfags, not schizo "i'm smarter than you without trying" fags like you. thanks
don't make me tap the sign

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 05:37:07 UTC No. 16259333

>>16259236
There are infinite stars in the Universe yet you can still pick one at random. Just look up and point. Your logic is flawed.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 06:13:47 UTC No. 16259360

>>16259326
>>16259333
How are you both so wrong.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 06:14:47 UTC No. 16259362

>>16259333
>>16259326
How are you both so wrong.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 06:38:09 UTC No. 16259386

>>16259333
I'm conflicted. These are the trips of truth but you're blatantly retarded... is there now an infinite number of stars in the observable universe? Can any normies itt go outside to check this?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 07:08:21 UTC No. 16259413

>>16259236
You can't actually. You can only pick from finite sets at random. But sometimes when those finite sets are very large it's useful to model this as picking from an infinite set, as long as you stay away from things that make this break down like non-measurable sets or conditioning on measure zero sets.

Anonymous at Sun, 30 Jun 2024 05:07:25 UTC No. 16260698

>>16259236
>infinite
nice try shekelstein

Anonymous at Sun, 30 Jun 2024 05:08:26 UTC No. 16260700

>>16259413
cool it with the anti semitism

Anonymous at Sun, 30 Jun 2024 05:08:35 UTC No. 16260701

What’s more strange is that to even exist without knowledge of your existence is more probable than existing with knowledge of your existence. Uwu