|
What level of mathematics education have you reached?
|
I'm currently brushing up on forgotten calculus and statistics, so I'm afraid I haven't retained very much of my math education.
|
You probably ought to have at least some level of familiarity with measure-theoretic probabality theory.
|
How do I get from basic calculus and statistics to measure-theoretic probability? Do you have any book recommendations. I guess I would be looking for the least rigorous books available. A list of courses might be helpful as well, so I could see the progression and how far away I am.
|
What was the content of the first two pages?
|
The book starts out its description in the setting of a coin flip experiment. It says, if we let "heads" equal 1 and "tails" equal 0, then we get a random variable:
[latex]X=X(\omega)\epsilon\{0,1\}[/latex]
where [latex]\displaystyle\omega[/latex] belongs to the outcome space [latex]\Omega=\{heads, tails\}[/latex]
After I deciphered the notation, that seemed straightforward enough. But, then under the innocuous subheading:
"Which are the most likely [latex]X(\omega)[/latex], what are they concentrated around, what are their spread?
the book says that to approach those problems, one first collects "good" subsets of [latex]\Omega[/latex] in a class F, where F is a [latex]\sigma[/latex]-field. Such a class is supposed to contain all interesting events. Certainly, {w:X(w)=0}={tail} and {w:X(w)=1}={head} must belong to F, but also the union, difference, and intersection of any events in F and its complement the empty set. If A is an element of F, so is it's complement, and if A,B are elements of F, so are A intersection B, A union B, A union B complement, B union A complement, A intersection B complement, B intersection A complement, etc.
Whaaa? What's all that [latex]\sigma[/latex]-field stuff got to do with the probabilites of X(w)? Also, if A and B are a member of a class F, isn't A union B also automatically a member of the class F, as well as A intersection B, etc.?