It is not a heuristic; it is a mathematical proof, given the condition I mentioned (namely that the probability does not diminish indefinitely. A circular path which does not contain the element has a probability of zero for the element, but we have no reason to expect circular paths.)
I don’t see a convincing argument here. In fact, I don’t see any argument at all, convincing or otherwise.
Do you think the argument from infinity is in fact a valuable heuristic?
It is not a heuristic; it is a mathematical proof, given the condition I mentioned (namely that the probability does not diminish indefinitely. A circular path which does not contain the element has a probability of zero for the element, but we have no reason to expect circular paths.)