Timeline for A Point-free probability theory?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 24, 2017 at 13:45 | answer | added | Gerald Edgar | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jul 24, 2017 at 12:27 | history | edited | Henry.L | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2 characters in body; edited tags; edited title
|
| Jul 24, 2017 at 12:26 | answer | added | Henry.L | timeline score: 7 | |
| Jul 24, 2017 at 7:54 | vote | accept | Stefan Perko | ||
| Jul 24, 2017 at 7:44 | answer | added | Costas Drossos | timeline score: 6 | |
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:19 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Aug 29, 2015 at 19:44 | comment | added | Michael Greinecker | Doing probability theory on pointfree Boolean algebras has a long history. See the survey On the axiomatic treatment of probability by Jerzy Łoś, Colloquium Mathematicae. Vol. 2. No. 3. 1955. | |
| Aug 29, 2015 at 12:12 | comment | added | Stefan Perko | @zhoraster Thank you for very much for clarifying both issues. I appreciate it. | |
| Aug 29, 2015 at 12:05 | comment | added | zhoraster | @Marco Golla, the poster's misbehavior is my fault, as I recommended him to post here. Also, the answer on MSE is quite unrelated to the question. Stefan Perko, asking a question was not a bad idea. There are many people (including me) who are also interested in an answer. | |
| Aug 29, 2015 at 11:59 | comment | added | Stefan Perko | @priel Ah, yes I missed that one and you seem to be right. I can't say more than that since the material is currently impenetrable to me. (maybe asking this question $\uparrow$ now wasn't the best idea) | |
| Aug 29, 2015 at 11:44 | comment | added | priel | There is also "Topological Riesz Spaces and Measure Theory" which discusses the classical spaces of random variables in this context. | |
| Aug 29, 2015 at 11:28 | comment | added | Stefan Perko | @priel I assume you are referring to volume 3. It is definitely interesting and worth looking into, but it's measure theory not exactly probability theory. I was under the impression, that concepts like "random variables" are special to probability theory. Still, thank you for this information. There seem to be many useful ideas there. | |
| Aug 29, 2015 at 11:00 | comment | added | priel | The standard point-free version of measure theory is to replace the algebraa of measurable sets by an abstract boolean algebra and the measure by a suitable function thereon. A good place to read about this and its motivation is the series of books by Fremlin, many of which are readily available online. | |
| Aug 29, 2015 at 10:42 | comment | added | Marco Golla | It is good etiquette to wait a reasonable amount of time before cross-posting from MSE to here (say a week, you didn't even wait for an hour) and to cross-link the question, so as to avoid double efforts. You already had a reply on MSE, by the way. | |
| Aug 29, 2015 at 10:40 | history | edited | Marco Golla | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added link and removed the category-theory tag.
|
| Aug 29, 2015 at 10:17 | review | First posts | |||
| Aug 29, 2015 at 10:42 | |||||
| Aug 29, 2015 at 10:15 | history | asked | Stefan Perko | CC BY-SA 3.0 |