I Probability paradox: P(X=x)=1/n >1

Trollfaz
Messages
143
Reaction score
14
I have a random variable X in range(0,n) where n<1, with a uniform distribution
Then the probability of sample space S=n x P(X=x) x<=n which must be 1
Manipulating the equation P(X=x)=1/n >1
Then this violates the fundamental law of probability which says that any probability must be at most 1.
How do we resolve this paradox here
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you assuming that the maximum value a probability density function may take is ##1##?

That's certainly not the case.
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
Trollfaz said:
Then this violates the fundamental law of probability which says that any probability must be at most 1.
You are confusing a probability density with a probability. The function you are describing is the probability density function and it can be arbitrarily large. The integral of a probability density is a probability. So only its integral must be no greater than 1, which is the case.
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50, WWGD and FactChecker
Just to say it explicitly, P(X=x) is always zero. ##P(|X-x|<\epsilon)\approx 2\epsilon f(x)## is the right interpretation of the density function
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
Trollfaz said:
I have a random variable X in range(0,n) where n<1, with a uniform distribution

If you had a uniform rod of mass 1 kg and length 1/2 meter, the density of the rod would be 2 kg per meter, even though the rod only has mass 1 kg. As the others pointed out, probability density is not the the same concept as probability.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Dale
An off-topic discussion has been deleted, and since the OP's question has been answered, this thread is now closed. Thanks folks.
 
  • Like
Likes WWGD
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top