Timeline for Do non-mathematical fields use the appropriate level of analytic/probabilistic rigor?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Jun 3, 2022 at 7:56 | history | suggested | The Amplitwist | CC BY-SA 4.0 | replaced broken link with WebArchive version |
| Jun 3, 2022 at 7:36 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jun 3, 2022 at 7:56 | |||||
| May 24, 2022 at 8:08 | history | edited | Glorfindel | CC BY-SA 4.0 | broken link fixed |
| Mar 22, 2012 at 1:50 | comment | added | ely | Regarding your comments on probability theory, I think Jaynes wrote the definitive rebuke of dogmatic dependence on measure theory, in Appendix B of his "Probability Theory: The Logic of Science." Reading Jaynes in grad school revived my love of math. Measure theory is important, insofar as it is an expedient tool, and if other folks like it for aesthetic reasons, that's fine. But in general, I think graduate-level education in probability has forgotten that applied math is supposed to be in the service of something... | |
| Mar 22, 2012 at 1:43 | history | answered | Michael Greinecker | CC BY-SA 3.0 |