/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9304916
50/50

either you choose it or you don't

>>9304919
/thread

>>9304916
1/infinity so 0.

>>9304916
On a serious note:
> there is no uniform distribution on reals or even integers
> if you want to sample a number, you need to specify a distribution, when you specify the distribution, the answer is clear, so it's kinda no-question if we're talking math models

>>9304926
Do you can't pick any number?

you can't choose from a pool of infinite numbers, that's something you should've known after 1st year

>>9305131
I can and I will. I choose 4

>>9305148
That's arbitrary not random

>>9305148
then you didn't choose randomly

>>9305148
sorry brainlet, 4 is not contained in this pool
you lose

>>9305150
>>9305151
He didn't say anything about "randomly"

>>9305152
"a pool" means any arbitrary pool. I choose 4 from the set [math]\{x| 0 <x < 1 \lor x = 4\}[/math]

>>9305131
yes, you can. the lebesgue measure induces a natural probability measure in any compact interval

>>9304916
depends if the universe is deterministic

Assuming no upper limit, the number pool to choose from would never fill in finite time, therefore no finite random choice could be chosen as the next step.
>>9304926

Random is also a loosely defined concept much like infinity, and "choosing randomly" is oxymoronic in the contrast of "choosing" being deterministic. To pick an integer number between 0 and 10 should produce a different result than acquiring a random integer number between 0 and 10, which would boil down to merely displacing the responsibility of picking the number to an outside force, therefore it is just as likely a computer could pick a number you'd assume was random as asking literally anyone else to pick a number.

How would you define a function for a whole number picker between 0 and 999?
First you'd need the pool of all 1000 choices, then you'd need a proof that when run 100,000 times would result in an even distribution of each 1000 integers being chosen, without the need to solve such an equation every time a number is to be picked, that is to say the programming needed to define random is inherently deterministic and intentionally designed to prove probability distribution, which suddenly makes any random event actually psuedorandom and the definition of randomness just being as worthlessly undefined as infinity or the ether.

>>9304916
infinitely small
source: math undegrad

>>9304916
> any number

100%