nn2ESn = ∑ Eξi= na, var Sn = ∑ varξi = nσ , var Sn= σ n.i= 1 i=1For a r<strong>and</strong>om variable obey<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> law N(0, 1) typical are absolutevalues <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> order 1. For example, <strong>the</strong> probability <strong>of</strong> its absolute valueexceed<strong>in</strong>g 3 is about 0.003 (hence <strong>the</strong> three sigma rule): we see that<strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>equality| Sn− E Sn|≤ 3, so that | Sn− na | ≤ 3σ nvar Snis practically certa<strong>in</strong>.Let a ≠ 0. Then na is <strong>the</strong> typical value <strong>of</strong> S n <strong>and</strong> its r<strong>and</strong>omdeviations do not exceed 3σ√n, a magnitude that <strong>in</strong>creases with nessentially slower than na. Given a large n, <strong>the</strong> order <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>determ<strong>in</strong>ate component na exceeds that <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> r<strong>and</strong>om deviations.Such is <strong>the</strong> purely scientific result known (at least <strong>in</strong> some particularcases) to Laplace. Let us see now what philosophical <strong>and</strong> emotionalsuperstructure did he build above it. Here is one more quotation fromhis Essai (pp. 37 – 38):Every time that a great power, <strong>in</strong>toxicated by <strong>the</strong> love <strong>of</strong> conquest,aspires to world dom<strong>in</strong>ation, <strong>the</strong> love <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>dependence produces,among <strong>the</strong> threatened nations, a coalition to which that power almostalways becomes a victim. [...] It is important <strong>the</strong>n, for both <strong>the</strong> stability<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> prosperity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> states, that <strong>the</strong>y not be extended beyond thoseboundaries to which <strong>the</strong>y are cont<strong>in</strong>ually restored by <strong>the</strong> action <strong>of</strong><strong>the</strong>se causes.This conclusion is reasonable, excellent <strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong>deed typical for <strong>the</strong>post-Napoleon France. But <strong>the</strong>n Laplace adds: This is ano<strong>the</strong>r result <strong>of</strong><strong>the</strong> probability calculus. He bears <strong>in</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d that, just as <strong>the</strong> determ<strong>in</strong>atecomponent prevails over r<strong>and</strong>omness, see above, so also <strong>in</strong> politics,what is dest<strong>in</strong>ed actually happens. But was it necessary to justify thatstatement by <strong>the</strong> CLT? For <strong>the</strong> modern reader it is quite obvious thatwe can only see here a remote analogy, peculiar not for science butexactly for metaphysics, <strong>and</strong> a s<strong>in</strong>gular <strong>and</strong> very facile metaphysics atthat.A bit later Laplace (p. 38) states, aga<strong>in</strong> cit<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong>probability: When a vast sea or a great distance separates a colonyfrom <strong>the</strong> centre <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> empire, <strong>the</strong> colony will sooner or later free itselfbecause it <strong>in</strong>variably attempts to get free. And elsewhere he (p. 123)says:The sequence <strong>of</strong> historic events shows us <strong>the</strong> constant action <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>great moral pr<strong>in</strong>ciples amidst <strong>the</strong> passions <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> various <strong>in</strong>tereststhat disturb societies <strong>in</strong> every way.90
He concludes that s<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>the</strong> action <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> great moral pr<strong>in</strong>ciples isconstant, <strong>and</strong>, as <strong>the</strong> CLT teaches us, <strong>the</strong>y will <strong>in</strong> any case prevail overr<strong>and</strong>omness, it is better to keep to <strong>the</strong>m, o<strong>the</strong>rwise you will experiencebad times. That conclusion is really commendable, but from <strong>the</strong>scientific viewpo<strong>in</strong>t it is obviously not better than convert<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>ese emperor to Christianity desired by Leibniz. At <strong>the</strong> end <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>Essai (p. 123) we f<strong>in</strong>d <strong>the</strong> celebrated phrase:It is remarkable that a science that began by consider<strong>in</strong>g games <strong>of</strong>chance should itself be raised to <strong>the</strong> rank <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> most importantsubjects <strong>of</strong> human knowledge.He means exactly those political applications <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong>probability.All <strong>the</strong> strangeness <strong>of</strong> metaphysics <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> philosophical <strong>and</strong>emotional spheres notwithst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g, Laplace shows an amaz<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>sightwhen concretely apply<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> probability <strong>the</strong>ory. I have lookedthrough <strong>the</strong> ATP with a special aim, to f<strong>in</strong>d at least one wrong def<strong>in</strong>itestatement. It seemed that support<strong>in</strong>g myself with a hundred <strong>and</strong> fiftyyears dur<strong>in</strong>g which science has been s<strong>in</strong>ce develop<strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> given suchstrangeness <strong>of</strong> his general philosophical views, it will not be difficultto f<strong>in</strong>d <strong>the</strong>re def<strong>in</strong>ite errors as well. Indeed, he considered somedubious problems on <strong>the</strong> probability <strong>of</strong> judicial decisions etc.It occurred, however, that it was not at all easy to f<strong>in</strong>d at least onewrong statement 9 . A great many applications that he considered can beseparated <strong>in</strong>to three parts:1. Obvious <strong>and</strong> absolutely unquestionable problems such as partialcensuses <strong>of</strong> population or <strong>the</strong> change <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> frequency <strong>of</strong> male births <strong>in</strong>Paris due to foundl<strong>in</strong>gs.2. Treatment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> results <strong>of</strong> astronomical observations. It isdifficult to discuss those applications s<strong>in</strong>ce vast material ought to bestudied.3. Obviously dubious problems like <strong>the</strong> probabilities <strong>of</strong> judicialdecisions. Here, however, Laplace’s conclusions are so careful thatpurely scientific errors are simply impossible.There is noth<strong>in</strong>g to say here about <strong>the</strong> first group, but someth<strong>in</strong>g<strong>in</strong>structive can be noted concern<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> second one. There, Laplace (p.46) quotes <strong>the</strong> result <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> treatment <strong>of</strong> observations: <strong>the</strong> ratio <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>masses <strong>of</strong> Jupiter <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> Sun is equal to 1:1071 <strong>and</strong> states that hisprobabilistic method gives odds <strong>of</strong> 1 000 000 to 1 that this result is nota hundredth <strong>in</strong> error 10 . Accord<strong>in</strong>g to modern data, that ratio is a littlemore than 2% larger so that <strong>the</strong> odds are obviously wrong.The great question here is, however, was that occasioned by amistaken treatment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> observations or by a systematic error <strong>of</strong>those observations impossible to elim<strong>in</strong>ate by any statistical treatment.I was unable to answer that question. In general, it is very easy tocommit such an error, <strong>and</strong> it is relevant to remark that quite recently<strong>the</strong> mass <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moon was corrected <strong>in</strong> its third significant digit so that<strong>the</strong> precision <strong>of</strong> modern numbers should be carefully considered. If,however, we tend to believe that <strong>the</strong> observations were treatedcorrectly, <strong>and</strong> modern numbers are also correct, we arrive at an91
- Page 1 and 2:
Studies in the History of Statistic
- Page 3 and 4:
Introduction by CompilerI am presen
- Page 5 and 6:
(Lect. Notes Math., No. 1021, 1983,
- Page 7 and 8:
sufficiently securely that a carefu
- Page 9 and 10:
is energy?) from chapter 4 of Feynm
- Page 11 and 12:
demand to apply transfinite numbers
- Page 13 and 14:
for stating that Ω consists of ele
- Page 15 and 16:
chances to draw a more suitable apa
- Page 17 and 18:
Let the space of elementary events
- Page 19 and 20:
2.3. Independence. When desiring to
- Page 21 and 22:
Eξ = ∑ aipi.Our form of definiti
- Page 23 and 24:
absolutely precisely if the pertine
- Page 25 and 26:
where x is any real number. If dens
- Page 27 and 28:
probability can be coupled with an
- Page 29 and 30:
Nowadays we are sure that no indepe
- Page 31 and 32:
λ = λ(T)with λ(T) being actually
- Page 33 and 34:
(1/B n )(m − A n )instead of the
- Page 35 and 36:
along with ξ. For example, if ξ i
- Page 37 and 38:
µ( − p0) ÷np0 (1 − p0)nhas an
- Page 39 and 40: distribution of the maximal term |s
- Page 41 and 42: ξ (ω) + ... + ξ (ω)n1n{ω :|
- Page 43 and 44: P{max ξ(t) ≥ x} = 0.01, 0 ≤ t
- Page 45 and 46: 1. This example and considerations
- Page 47 and 48: IIV. N. TutubalinTreatment of Obser
- Page 49 and 50: structure of statistical methods, d
- Page 51 and 52: Suppose that we have adopted the pa
- Page 53 and 54: and the variances are inversely pro
- Page 55 and 56: It is interesting therefore to see
- Page 57 and 58: is applied with P(t) being a polyno
- Page 59 and 60: ut some mathematical tricks describ
- Page 61 and 62: It is clear therefore that no speci
- Page 63 and 64: of various groups of machines, and
- Page 65 and 66: nnA(λ) x sin λ t, B(λ) = x cosλ
- Page 67 and 68: of the mathematical model of the Br
- Page 69 and 70: dF(λ) = f (λ) dλ, so that B( t
- Page 71 and 72: usually very little of them. Indeed
- Page 73 and 74: This is the celebrated model of aut
- Page 75 and 76: applications of the theory of stoch
- Page 77 and 78: achieved by differentiating because
- Page 79 and 80: u(x 1 , x 2 , t 1 , t 2 ) = v(x 1 ,
- Page 81 and 82: Reasoning based on common sense and
- Page 83 and 84: answering that question is extremel
- Page 85 and 86: IIIV. N. TutubalinThe Boundaries of
- Page 87 and 88: periodograms. It occurred that work
- Page 89: at point x = 1. However, preceding
- Page 93 and 94: The verification of the truth of a
- Page 95 and 96: In the purely scientific sense this
- Page 97 and 98: ought to learn at once the simple t
- Page 99 and 100: the material world science had inde
- Page 101 and 102: values of (2.1) realized in the n e
- Page 103 and 104: *several dozen. The totality µ ica
- Page 105 and 106: Mendelian laws. It is not sufficien
- Page 107 and 108: example, the problem of the objecti
- Page 109 and 110: a linear function is not restricted
- Page 111 and 112: 258 - 82 - 176 cases or 68.5% of al
- Page 113 and 114: The Framingham investigation indeed
- Page 115 and 116: or, for discrete observations,IT(ω
- Page 117 and 118: What objections can be made? First,
- Page 119 and 120: eliability and queuing are known to
- Page 121 and 122: Kolman E. (1939 Russian), Perversio
- Page 123 and 124: measurement is provided. Recently,
- Page 125 and 126: which means that sooner or later th
- Page 127 and 128: The foundations of the Mises approa
- Page 129 and 130: A rather subtle arsenal is develope
- Page 131 and 132: 4.3. General remarks on §§ 4.1 an
- Page 133 and 134: BibliographyAlimov Yu. I. (1976, 19
- Page 135 and 136: processes are now going on in the s
- Page 137 and 138: obtaining a deviation from the theo
- Page 139 and 140: VIOscar SheyninOn the Bernoulli Law