I’m pretty sure you just used this as an rhetoric tool, but by bayesian theory, isn’t it impossible to construct a hypothesis which allocates a probability of zero to an event?
But don’t you say exactly that in your text?
even if the alternative hypothesis does not allow it at all
I mean allocating a probability of zero to an event implies that it doesn’t matter what evidence is presented to you, the probability of that particular event will never become anything else than zero.
And as it is impossible to disprove something in the same way it is impossible to prove something, a hypothesis which allocates a probability of zero to an event can not be true and is therefore not of use as a hypothesis in bayesian math.
Someone please correct me if I’m wrong...
I’m pretty sure you just used this as an rhetoric tool, but by bayesian theory, isn’t it impossible to construct a hypothesis which allocates a probability of zero to an event? But don’t you say exactly that in your text?
I mean allocating a probability of zero to an event implies that it doesn’t matter what evidence is presented to you, the probability of that particular event will never become anything else than zero. And as it is impossible to disprove something in the same way it is impossible to prove something, a hypothesis which allocates a probability of zero to an event can not be true and is therefore not of use as a hypothesis in bayesian math. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong...