should I learn measure theory before learning probability?
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
I am currently looking to learn about probability and statistics since I am interested in actuarial science. I have some knowledge on real analysis(rudins book except the last 2 chapters) and linear algebra(axlers linear algebra done right). I have very little prior knowledge about prob/stat.
When researching prob/stat books to order I encountered the distinction between books that use measure theory and those that don't.
Anyway I am not really sure where to start and was wondering if someone could kindly recommend some books and which order to read them in.
probability measure-theory book-recommendation
New contributor
Jagol95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
I am currently looking to learn about probability and statistics since I am interested in actuarial science. I have some knowledge on real analysis(rudins book except the last 2 chapters) and linear algebra(axlers linear algebra done right). I have very little prior knowledge about prob/stat.
When researching prob/stat books to order I encountered the distinction between books that use measure theory and those that don't.
Anyway I am not really sure where to start and was wondering if someone could kindly recommend some books and which order to read them in.
probability measure-theory book-recommendation
New contributor
Jagol95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The last two chapters of Rudin do a great job motivating measure theory.
– Rushabh Mehta
9 hours ago
1
Learn them at the same time.
– Shalop
8 hours ago
Can you help the mathematician s by explaining what one studies in actuarial science. Eg if you only work with discrete distributions measure theory is irrelevant
– seanv507
2 hours ago
Another approach is to go through a book that introduces both at the same. Williams' Probability with Martingales is a fine textbook.
– twnly
2 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
up vote
5
down vote
favorite
I am currently looking to learn about probability and statistics since I am interested in actuarial science. I have some knowledge on real analysis(rudins book except the last 2 chapters) and linear algebra(axlers linear algebra done right). I have very little prior knowledge about prob/stat.
When researching prob/stat books to order I encountered the distinction between books that use measure theory and those that don't.
Anyway I am not really sure where to start and was wondering if someone could kindly recommend some books and which order to read them in.
probability measure-theory book-recommendation
New contributor
Jagol95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I am currently looking to learn about probability and statistics since I am interested in actuarial science. I have some knowledge on real analysis(rudins book except the last 2 chapters) and linear algebra(axlers linear algebra done right). I have very little prior knowledge about prob/stat.
When researching prob/stat books to order I encountered the distinction between books that use measure theory and those that don't.
Anyway I am not really sure where to start and was wondering if someone could kindly recommend some books and which order to read them in.
probability measure-theory book-recommendation
probability measure-theory book-recommendation
New contributor
Jagol95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Jagol95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 9 hours ago
GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
12.6k72344
12.6k72344
New contributor
Jagol95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 9 hours ago
Jagol95
384
384
New contributor
Jagol95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Jagol95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Jagol95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The last two chapters of Rudin do a great job motivating measure theory.
– Rushabh Mehta
9 hours ago
1
Learn them at the same time.
– Shalop
8 hours ago
Can you help the mathematician s by explaining what one studies in actuarial science. Eg if you only work with discrete distributions measure theory is irrelevant
– seanv507
2 hours ago
Another approach is to go through a book that introduces both at the same. Williams' Probability with Martingales is a fine textbook.
– twnly
2 hours ago
add a comment |
The last two chapters of Rudin do a great job motivating measure theory.
– Rushabh Mehta
9 hours ago
1
Learn them at the same time.
– Shalop
8 hours ago
Can you help the mathematician s by explaining what one studies in actuarial science. Eg if you only work with discrete distributions measure theory is irrelevant
– seanv507
2 hours ago
Another approach is to go through a book that introduces both at the same. Williams' Probability with Martingales is a fine textbook.
– twnly
2 hours ago
The last two chapters of Rudin do a great job motivating measure theory.
– Rushabh Mehta
9 hours ago
The last two chapters of Rudin do a great job motivating measure theory.
– Rushabh Mehta
9 hours ago
1
1
Learn them at the same time.
– Shalop
8 hours ago
Learn them at the same time.
– Shalop
8 hours ago
Can you help the mathematician s by explaining what one studies in actuarial science. Eg if you only work with discrete distributions measure theory is irrelevant
– seanv507
2 hours ago
Can you help the mathematician s by explaining what one studies in actuarial science. Eg if you only work with discrete distributions measure theory is irrelevant
– seanv507
2 hours ago
Another approach is to go through a book that introduces both at the same. Williams' Probability with Martingales is a fine textbook.
– twnly
2 hours ago
Another approach is to go through a book that introduces both at the same. Williams' Probability with Martingales is a fine textbook.
– twnly
2 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
In fact, it's the inverse. Try some introductory probability books (e.g. Kai Lai Chung's introductory probability book), before beginning real analysis. In that way, you know the motivation for studying abstract integration. If you want an introductory book with more discussions on measure theory, try David Pollard's A User's Guide to Measure Theoretic Probability.
2
+1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
– Ethan Bolker
9 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
A lot of measure theory-oriented books I've seen seem to presuppose plenty of familiarity with topological/set theoretic concepts and notation. For instance, when using Folland's "Real Analysis" in grad school for learning Lebesgue integration, I was totally unprepared for the motivational discussions about uncountable and unmeasurable sets, even though I had some prior familiarity with infinite sets and the basic pathologies that can arise in them (e.g., Cantor set). That made getting through even the first couple chapters really difficult because I felt like I was groping around in the dark and just carrying out formal manipulations without a clear sense of the obstacles that these advanced tools were being developed to overcome. A brief look through the intro of Pollard's book (recommended above) suggests to me the same issues.
As such, I'd recommend working through an undergraduate-level Topology text before approaching anything with measure theory. I've been doing that with S. Morris's "Topology without Tears" (free online!), and it's really helped me flesh out how much variety there is in general spaces before we even get to the notion of a metric. I feel like I'm almost ready to revisit Folland--just after I finish Morris's chapters on metric spaces and compactness. This also dovetails nicely with Axler's "Linear Algebra Done Right", since it gives another side of the story motivating the development of different kinds of norms.
Also, since you're looking at statistical issues, I'd also recommend reading through the first couple of chapters of E.T. Jaynes's "Probability Theory: The Logic of Science", since he gives a very accessible description of a lot of fundamental issues in probability/statistics that are often hand-waved away in introductory treatments.
1
Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The new book on measure theory that I am writing may be useful to you. It's title is Measure, Integration & Real Analysis. The first eight chapters are currently freely available on the book's website: http://measure.axler.net/. More chapters will be available on the website as they are completed.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Quoting Rick Durrett from his book Probability: Theory and Examples, "Probability theory has a right and a left hand. On the left is the rigorous foundational work using the tools of measure theory. The right hand 'thinks probabilistically', reduces problems to gambling situations, coin-tossing, and motions of a physical particle."
A lot of probabilistic principles can be learned from finite or countable sample spaces, for which essentially no measure theory is required. Ross's a First Course in Probability can be profitably read without any measure theory. Once you start learning about things like Brownian motion, you'll find that measure theory becomes unavoidable to define the concept precisely. But even there, thinking about Brownian motion as just a discrete random walk with the mesh size approaching 0 can get you quite far.
New contributor
norfair is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Ross' book (in your answer) assumes that all subsets of the sample space Ω is measurable to avoid measure theory. That's fine for undergraduate statistics majors, but we all know the inconvenience of discussing mathematical ideas in imprecise mathematical language. IMHO, Chung/Pollard/other introductory probability books that adopt Kolmogorov's axiomatic definition of probability are much better choice.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
3
OP mentions interest in actuarial science. I agree that any serious probabilist or theoretical statistician will eventually need a solid grounding in the logical foundations. But honestly, there are many bright people in industry and even applied statisticians in academia who solve sophisticated problems involving probabilistic reasoning and wouldn't be able to state Kolmogorov's definition of a probability space. A famous statistician once said, “I wouldn't want to fly in a plane whose design depended on whether a function was Riemann or Lebesgue integrable."
– norfair
6 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
In fact, it's the inverse. Try some introductory probability books (e.g. Kai Lai Chung's introductory probability book), before beginning real analysis. In that way, you know the motivation for studying abstract integration. If you want an introductory book with more discussions on measure theory, try David Pollard's A User's Guide to Measure Theoretic Probability.
2
+1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
– Ethan Bolker
9 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
In fact, it's the inverse. Try some introductory probability books (e.g. Kai Lai Chung's introductory probability book), before beginning real analysis. In that way, you know the motivation for studying abstract integration. If you want an introductory book with more discussions on measure theory, try David Pollard's A User's Guide to Measure Theoretic Probability.
2
+1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
– Ethan Bolker
9 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
In fact, it's the inverse. Try some introductory probability books (e.g. Kai Lai Chung's introductory probability book), before beginning real analysis. In that way, you know the motivation for studying abstract integration. If you want an introductory book with more discussions on measure theory, try David Pollard's A User's Guide to Measure Theoretic Probability.
In fact, it's the inverse. Try some introductory probability books (e.g. Kai Lai Chung's introductory probability book), before beginning real analysis. In that way, you know the motivation for studying abstract integration. If you want an introductory book with more discussions on measure theory, try David Pollard's A User's Guide to Measure Theoretic Probability.
answered 9 hours ago
GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
12.6k72344
12.6k72344
2
+1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
– Ethan Bolker
9 hours ago
add a comment |
2
+1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
– Ethan Bolker
9 hours ago
2
2
+1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
– Ethan Bolker
9 hours ago
+1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
– Ethan Bolker
9 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
A lot of measure theory-oriented books I've seen seem to presuppose plenty of familiarity with topological/set theoretic concepts and notation. For instance, when using Folland's "Real Analysis" in grad school for learning Lebesgue integration, I was totally unprepared for the motivational discussions about uncountable and unmeasurable sets, even though I had some prior familiarity with infinite sets and the basic pathologies that can arise in them (e.g., Cantor set). That made getting through even the first couple chapters really difficult because I felt like I was groping around in the dark and just carrying out formal manipulations without a clear sense of the obstacles that these advanced tools were being developed to overcome. A brief look through the intro of Pollard's book (recommended above) suggests to me the same issues.
As such, I'd recommend working through an undergraduate-level Topology text before approaching anything with measure theory. I've been doing that with S. Morris's "Topology without Tears" (free online!), and it's really helped me flesh out how much variety there is in general spaces before we even get to the notion of a metric. I feel like I'm almost ready to revisit Folland--just after I finish Morris's chapters on metric spaces and compactness. This also dovetails nicely with Axler's "Linear Algebra Done Right", since it gives another side of the story motivating the development of different kinds of norms.
Also, since you're looking at statistical issues, I'd also recommend reading through the first couple of chapters of E.T. Jaynes's "Probability Theory: The Logic of Science", since he gives a very accessible description of a lot of fundamental issues in probability/statistics that are often hand-waved away in introductory treatments.
1
Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
A lot of measure theory-oriented books I've seen seem to presuppose plenty of familiarity with topological/set theoretic concepts and notation. For instance, when using Folland's "Real Analysis" in grad school for learning Lebesgue integration, I was totally unprepared for the motivational discussions about uncountable and unmeasurable sets, even though I had some prior familiarity with infinite sets and the basic pathologies that can arise in them (e.g., Cantor set). That made getting through even the first couple chapters really difficult because I felt like I was groping around in the dark and just carrying out formal manipulations without a clear sense of the obstacles that these advanced tools were being developed to overcome. A brief look through the intro of Pollard's book (recommended above) suggests to me the same issues.
As such, I'd recommend working through an undergraduate-level Topology text before approaching anything with measure theory. I've been doing that with S. Morris's "Topology without Tears" (free online!), and it's really helped me flesh out how much variety there is in general spaces before we even get to the notion of a metric. I feel like I'm almost ready to revisit Folland--just after I finish Morris's chapters on metric spaces and compactness. This also dovetails nicely with Axler's "Linear Algebra Done Right", since it gives another side of the story motivating the development of different kinds of norms.
Also, since you're looking at statistical issues, I'd also recommend reading through the first couple of chapters of E.T. Jaynes's "Probability Theory: The Logic of Science", since he gives a very accessible description of a lot of fundamental issues in probability/statistics that are often hand-waved away in introductory treatments.
1
Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
A lot of measure theory-oriented books I've seen seem to presuppose plenty of familiarity with topological/set theoretic concepts and notation. For instance, when using Folland's "Real Analysis" in grad school for learning Lebesgue integration, I was totally unprepared for the motivational discussions about uncountable and unmeasurable sets, even though I had some prior familiarity with infinite sets and the basic pathologies that can arise in them (e.g., Cantor set). That made getting through even the first couple chapters really difficult because I felt like I was groping around in the dark and just carrying out formal manipulations without a clear sense of the obstacles that these advanced tools were being developed to overcome. A brief look through the intro of Pollard's book (recommended above) suggests to me the same issues.
As such, I'd recommend working through an undergraduate-level Topology text before approaching anything with measure theory. I've been doing that with S. Morris's "Topology without Tears" (free online!), and it's really helped me flesh out how much variety there is in general spaces before we even get to the notion of a metric. I feel like I'm almost ready to revisit Folland--just after I finish Morris's chapters on metric spaces and compactness. This also dovetails nicely with Axler's "Linear Algebra Done Right", since it gives another side of the story motivating the development of different kinds of norms.
Also, since you're looking at statistical issues, I'd also recommend reading through the first couple of chapters of E.T. Jaynes's "Probability Theory: The Logic of Science", since he gives a very accessible description of a lot of fundamental issues in probability/statistics that are often hand-waved away in introductory treatments.
A lot of measure theory-oriented books I've seen seem to presuppose plenty of familiarity with topological/set theoretic concepts and notation. For instance, when using Folland's "Real Analysis" in grad school for learning Lebesgue integration, I was totally unprepared for the motivational discussions about uncountable and unmeasurable sets, even though I had some prior familiarity with infinite sets and the basic pathologies that can arise in them (e.g., Cantor set). That made getting through even the first couple chapters really difficult because I felt like I was groping around in the dark and just carrying out formal manipulations without a clear sense of the obstacles that these advanced tools were being developed to overcome. A brief look through the intro of Pollard's book (recommended above) suggests to me the same issues.
As such, I'd recommend working through an undergraduate-level Topology text before approaching anything with measure theory. I've been doing that with S. Morris's "Topology without Tears" (free online!), and it's really helped me flesh out how much variety there is in general spaces before we even get to the notion of a metric. I feel like I'm almost ready to revisit Folland--just after I finish Morris's chapters on metric spaces and compactness. This also dovetails nicely with Axler's "Linear Algebra Done Right", since it gives another side of the story motivating the development of different kinds of norms.
Also, since you're looking at statistical issues, I'd also recommend reading through the first couple of chapters of E.T. Jaynes's "Probability Theory: The Logic of Science", since he gives a very accessible description of a lot of fundamental issues in probability/statistics that are often hand-waved away in introductory treatments.
answered 8 hours ago
Cassius12
759
759
1
Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
1
1
Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The new book on measure theory that I am writing may be useful to you. It's title is Measure, Integration & Real Analysis. The first eight chapters are currently freely available on the book's website: http://measure.axler.net/. More chapters will be available on the website as they are completed.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The new book on measure theory that I am writing may be useful to you. It's title is Measure, Integration & Real Analysis. The first eight chapters are currently freely available on the book's website: http://measure.axler.net/. More chapters will be available on the website as they are completed.
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
The new book on measure theory that I am writing may be useful to you. It's title is Measure, Integration & Real Analysis. The first eight chapters are currently freely available on the book's website: http://measure.axler.net/. More chapters will be available on the website as they are completed.
The new book on measure theory that I am writing may be useful to you. It's title is Measure, Integration & Real Analysis. The first eight chapters are currently freely available on the book's website: http://measure.axler.net/. More chapters will be available on the website as they are completed.
answered 2 hours ago
Sheldon Axler
3,431615
3,431615
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Quoting Rick Durrett from his book Probability: Theory and Examples, "Probability theory has a right and a left hand. On the left is the rigorous foundational work using the tools of measure theory. The right hand 'thinks probabilistically', reduces problems to gambling situations, coin-tossing, and motions of a physical particle."
A lot of probabilistic principles can be learned from finite or countable sample spaces, for which essentially no measure theory is required. Ross's a First Course in Probability can be profitably read without any measure theory. Once you start learning about things like Brownian motion, you'll find that measure theory becomes unavoidable to define the concept precisely. But even there, thinking about Brownian motion as just a discrete random walk with the mesh size approaching 0 can get you quite far.
New contributor
norfair is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Ross' book (in your answer) assumes that all subsets of the sample space Ω is measurable to avoid measure theory. That's fine for undergraduate statistics majors, but we all know the inconvenience of discussing mathematical ideas in imprecise mathematical language. IMHO, Chung/Pollard/other introductory probability books that adopt Kolmogorov's axiomatic definition of probability are much better choice.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
3
OP mentions interest in actuarial science. I agree that any serious probabilist or theoretical statistician will eventually need a solid grounding in the logical foundations. But honestly, there are many bright people in industry and even applied statisticians in academia who solve sophisticated problems involving probabilistic reasoning and wouldn't be able to state Kolmogorov's definition of a probability space. A famous statistician once said, “I wouldn't want to fly in a plane whose design depended on whether a function was Riemann or Lebesgue integrable."
– norfair
6 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
Quoting Rick Durrett from his book Probability: Theory and Examples, "Probability theory has a right and a left hand. On the left is the rigorous foundational work using the tools of measure theory. The right hand 'thinks probabilistically', reduces problems to gambling situations, coin-tossing, and motions of a physical particle."
A lot of probabilistic principles can be learned from finite or countable sample spaces, for which essentially no measure theory is required. Ross's a First Course in Probability can be profitably read without any measure theory. Once you start learning about things like Brownian motion, you'll find that measure theory becomes unavoidable to define the concept precisely. But even there, thinking about Brownian motion as just a discrete random walk with the mesh size approaching 0 can get you quite far.
New contributor
norfair is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Ross' book (in your answer) assumes that all subsets of the sample space Ω is measurable to avoid measure theory. That's fine for undergraduate statistics majors, but we all know the inconvenience of discussing mathematical ideas in imprecise mathematical language. IMHO, Chung/Pollard/other introductory probability books that adopt Kolmogorov's axiomatic definition of probability are much better choice.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
3
OP mentions interest in actuarial science. I agree that any serious probabilist or theoretical statistician will eventually need a solid grounding in the logical foundations. But honestly, there are many bright people in industry and even applied statisticians in academia who solve sophisticated problems involving probabilistic reasoning and wouldn't be able to state Kolmogorov's definition of a probability space. A famous statistician once said, “I wouldn't want to fly in a plane whose design depended on whether a function was Riemann or Lebesgue integrable."
– norfair
6 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Quoting Rick Durrett from his book Probability: Theory and Examples, "Probability theory has a right and a left hand. On the left is the rigorous foundational work using the tools of measure theory. The right hand 'thinks probabilistically', reduces problems to gambling situations, coin-tossing, and motions of a physical particle."
A lot of probabilistic principles can be learned from finite or countable sample spaces, for which essentially no measure theory is required. Ross's a First Course in Probability can be profitably read without any measure theory. Once you start learning about things like Brownian motion, you'll find that measure theory becomes unavoidable to define the concept precisely. But even there, thinking about Brownian motion as just a discrete random walk with the mesh size approaching 0 can get you quite far.
New contributor
norfair is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Quoting Rick Durrett from his book Probability: Theory and Examples, "Probability theory has a right and a left hand. On the left is the rigorous foundational work using the tools of measure theory. The right hand 'thinks probabilistically', reduces problems to gambling situations, coin-tossing, and motions of a physical particle."
A lot of probabilistic principles can be learned from finite or countable sample spaces, for which essentially no measure theory is required. Ross's a First Course in Probability can be profitably read without any measure theory. Once you start learning about things like Brownian motion, you'll find that measure theory becomes unavoidable to define the concept precisely. But even there, thinking about Brownian motion as just a discrete random walk with the mesh size approaching 0 can get you quite far.
New contributor
norfair is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
norfair is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 8 hours ago
norfair
537
537
New contributor
norfair is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
norfair is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
norfair is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Ross' book (in your answer) assumes that all subsets of the sample space Ω is measurable to avoid measure theory. That's fine for undergraduate statistics majors, but we all know the inconvenience of discussing mathematical ideas in imprecise mathematical language. IMHO, Chung/Pollard/other introductory probability books that adopt Kolmogorov's axiomatic definition of probability are much better choice.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
3
OP mentions interest in actuarial science. I agree that any serious probabilist or theoretical statistician will eventually need a solid grounding in the logical foundations. But honestly, there are many bright people in industry and even applied statisticians in academia who solve sophisticated problems involving probabilistic reasoning and wouldn't be able to state Kolmogorov's definition of a probability space. A famous statistician once said, “I wouldn't want to fly in a plane whose design depended on whether a function was Riemann or Lebesgue integrable."
– norfair
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Ross' book (in your answer) assumes that all subsets of the sample space Ω is measurable to avoid measure theory. That's fine for undergraduate statistics majors, but we all know the inconvenience of discussing mathematical ideas in imprecise mathematical language. IMHO, Chung/Pollard/other introductory probability books that adopt Kolmogorov's axiomatic definition of probability are much better choice.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
3
OP mentions interest in actuarial science. I agree that any serious probabilist or theoretical statistician will eventually need a solid grounding in the logical foundations. But honestly, there are many bright people in industry and even applied statisticians in academia who solve sophisticated problems involving probabilistic reasoning and wouldn't be able to state Kolmogorov's definition of a probability space. A famous statistician once said, “I wouldn't want to fly in a plane whose design depended on whether a function was Riemann or Lebesgue integrable."
– norfair
6 hours ago
Ross' book (in your answer) assumes that all subsets of the sample space Ω is measurable to avoid measure theory. That's fine for undergraduate statistics majors, but we all know the inconvenience of discussing mathematical ideas in imprecise mathematical language. IMHO, Chung/Pollard/other introductory probability books that adopt Kolmogorov's axiomatic definition of probability are much better choice.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
Ross' book (in your answer) assumes that all subsets of the sample space Ω is measurable to avoid measure theory. That's fine for undergraduate statistics majors, but we all know the inconvenience of discussing mathematical ideas in imprecise mathematical language. IMHO, Chung/Pollard/other introductory probability books that adopt Kolmogorov's axiomatic definition of probability are much better choice.
– GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
6 hours ago
3
3
OP mentions interest in actuarial science. I agree that any serious probabilist or theoretical statistician will eventually need a solid grounding in the logical foundations. But honestly, there are many bright people in industry and even applied statisticians in academia who solve sophisticated problems involving probabilistic reasoning and wouldn't be able to state Kolmogorov's definition of a probability space. A famous statistician once said, “I wouldn't want to fly in a plane whose design depended on whether a function was Riemann or Lebesgue integrable."
– norfair
6 hours ago
OP mentions interest in actuarial science. I agree that any serious probabilist or theoretical statistician will eventually need a solid grounding in the logical foundations. But honestly, there are many bright people in industry and even applied statisticians in academia who solve sophisticated problems involving probabilistic reasoning and wouldn't be able to state Kolmogorov's definition of a probability space. A famous statistician once said, “I wouldn't want to fly in a plane whose design depended on whether a function was Riemann or Lebesgue integrable."
– norfair
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Jagol95 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Jagol95 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Jagol95 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Jagol95 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3025828%2fshould-i-learn-measure-theory-before-learning-probability%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
The last two chapters of Rudin do a great job motivating measure theory.
– Rushabh Mehta
9 hours ago
1
Learn them at the same time.
– Shalop
8 hours ago
Can you help the mathematician s by explaining what one studies in actuarial science. Eg if you only work with discrete distributions measure theory is irrelevant
– seanv507
2 hours ago
Another approach is to go through a book that introduces both at the same. Williams' Probability with Martingales is a fine textbook.
– twnly
2 hours ago