Timeline for Why do we need sigma-algebras to define probability spaces?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 13, 2021 at 19:43 | comment | added | csha | The link to the “solid reasons why” is broken :( Does anybody have a working link, or a summary of it? | |
| Jun 11, 2020 at 14:32 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Jan 19, 2020 at 19:32 | history | edited | Alexis | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 26 characters in body
|
| Jan 19, 2020 at 19:25 | history | edited | Alexis | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 26 characters in body
|
| Mar 14, 2019 at 18:11 | comment | added | Sycorax♦ | I think that this answer could make a great addition to this thread if you re-work it a bit. As it stands, it's hard to follow because large portions of it depend on links to other comment threads. I think if you laid it out as a bottom-to-top explanation of how measures, finite $\sigma$-additivity and $\sigma$-algebra fit together as necessary features of probability spaces, it would be much stronger. You're very close, because you've already broken the answer into different segments, but I think the segments need more justification and reasoning to be fully supported. | |
| Mar 13, 2019 at 2:38 | history | answered | Yatharth Agarwal | CC BY-SA 4.0 |