From: ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de   
      
   Ethan Carter  wrote or quoted:   
   >The definition of ``probability'' (in the sense of how to interpret it)   
   >is sort of an open problem.   
      
   |The probability P(A|C) is interpreted as a measure of the   
   |tendency, or propensity, of the physical conditions describe   
   |by C to produce the result A. It differs logically from the   
   |older limit-frequency theory in that probability is   
   |interpreted, but not redefined or derived from anything more   
   |fundamental. It remains, mathematically, a fundamental   
   |undefined term.   
   "Quantum Mechanics" (1998) - Leslie E. Ballentine   
      
   >Thus far we have interpreted the probability of an event of a given   
   >experiment as being a measure of how frequently the event will occur   
   >when the experiment is con- tinually repeated.   
      
   |One of the oldest interpretations is the /limit frequency/   
   |interpretation. If the conditioning event /C/ can lead   
   |to either A or "not A", and if in /n/ repetitions of such   
   |a situation the event A occurs /m/ times, then it is asserted   
   |that P(A|C) = lim n-->oo (m/n). This provides not only   
   |an interpretation of probability, but also a definition   
   |of probability in terms of a numerical frequency ratio.   
   |Hence the axioms of abstract probability theory can   
   |be derived as theorems of the frequency theory.   
   |   
   |In spite of its superficial appeal, the limit frequency   
   |interpretation has been widely discarded, primarily because   
   |there is no assurance that the above limit really exists for   
   |the actual sequences of events to which one wishes to apply   
   |probability theory.   
   |   
   "Quantum Mechanics" (1998) - Leslie E. Ballentine   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)