should I learn measure theory before learning probability?











up vote
5
down vote

favorite
1












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.










share|cite|improve this question









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















up vote
5
down vote

favorite
1












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.










share|cite|improve this question









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













up vote
5
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
5
down vote

favorite
1






1





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.










share|cite|improve this question









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






share|cite|improve this question









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.











share|cite|improve this question









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.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








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


















  • 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










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.






share|cite|improve this answer

















  • 2




    +1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
    – Ethan Bolker
    9 hours ago


















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.






share|cite|improve this answer

















  • 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


















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.






share|cite|improve this answer




























    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer








    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











    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    Jagol95 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    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

























    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer

















    • 2




      +1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
      – Ethan Bolker
      9 hours ago















    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer

















    • 2




      +1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
      – Ethan Bolker
      9 hours ago













    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    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.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    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














    • 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










    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer

















    • 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















    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer

















    • 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













    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    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.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    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














    • 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










    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.






    share|cite|improve this answer

























      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.






      share|cite|improve this answer























        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.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        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.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered 2 hours ago









        Sheldon Axler

        3,431615




        3,431615






















            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.






            share|cite|improve this answer








            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















            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.






            share|cite|improve this answer








            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













            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.






            share|cite|improve this answer








            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.







            share|cite|improve this answer








            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.









            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer






            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


















            • 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










            Jagol95 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            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





















































            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            Catalogne

            Violoncelliste

            Héron pourpré