should I learn measure theory before learning probability?












6












$begingroup$


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











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The last two chapters of Rudin do a great job motivating measure theory.
    $endgroup$
    – Don Thousand
    Dec 4 '18 at 17:20






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Learn them at the same time.
    $endgroup$
    – Shalop
    Dec 4 '18 at 17:35










  • $begingroup$
    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
    $endgroup$
    – seanv507
    Dec 4 '18 at 23:31










  • $begingroup$
    Another approach is to go through a book that introduces both at the same. Williams' Probability with Martingales is a fine textbook.
    $endgroup$
    – twnly
    Dec 5 '18 at 0:23
















6












$begingroup$


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











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The last two chapters of Rudin do a great job motivating measure theory.
    $endgroup$
    – Don Thousand
    Dec 4 '18 at 17:20






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Learn them at the same time.
    $endgroup$
    – Shalop
    Dec 4 '18 at 17:35










  • $begingroup$
    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
    $endgroup$
    – seanv507
    Dec 4 '18 at 23:31










  • $begingroup$
    Another approach is to go through a book that introduces both at the same. Williams' Probability with Martingales is a fine textbook.
    $endgroup$
    – twnly
    Dec 5 '18 at 0:23














6












6








6


1



$begingroup$


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











$endgroup$




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




probability measure-theory book-recommendation






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 4 '18 at 17:14









GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會

12.8k72445




12.8k72445










asked Dec 4 '18 at 16:59









Jagol95Jagol95

1037




1037












  • $begingroup$
    The last two chapters of Rudin do a great job motivating measure theory.
    $endgroup$
    – Don Thousand
    Dec 4 '18 at 17:20






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Learn them at the same time.
    $endgroup$
    – Shalop
    Dec 4 '18 at 17:35










  • $begingroup$
    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
    $endgroup$
    – seanv507
    Dec 4 '18 at 23:31










  • $begingroup$
    Another approach is to go through a book that introduces both at the same. Williams' Probability with Martingales is a fine textbook.
    $endgroup$
    – twnly
    Dec 5 '18 at 0:23


















  • $begingroup$
    The last two chapters of Rudin do a great job motivating measure theory.
    $endgroup$
    – Don Thousand
    Dec 4 '18 at 17:20






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Learn them at the same time.
    $endgroup$
    – Shalop
    Dec 4 '18 at 17:35










  • $begingroup$
    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
    $endgroup$
    – seanv507
    Dec 4 '18 at 23:31










  • $begingroup$
    Another approach is to go through a book that introduces both at the same. Williams' Probability with Martingales is a fine textbook.
    $endgroup$
    – twnly
    Dec 5 '18 at 0:23
















$begingroup$
The last two chapters of Rudin do a great job motivating measure theory.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
Dec 4 '18 at 17:20




$begingroup$
The last two chapters of Rudin do a great job motivating measure theory.
$endgroup$
– Don Thousand
Dec 4 '18 at 17:20




2




2




$begingroup$
Learn them at the same time.
$endgroup$
– Shalop
Dec 4 '18 at 17:35




$begingroup$
Learn them at the same time.
$endgroup$
– Shalop
Dec 4 '18 at 17:35












$begingroup$
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
$endgroup$
– seanv507
Dec 4 '18 at 23:31




$begingroup$
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
$endgroup$
– seanv507
Dec 4 '18 at 23:31












$begingroup$
Another approach is to go through a book that introduces both at the same. Williams' Probability with Martingales is a fine textbook.
$endgroup$
– twnly
Dec 5 '18 at 0:23




$begingroup$
Another approach is to go through a book that introduces both at the same. Williams' Probability with Martingales is a fine textbook.
$endgroup$
– twnly
Dec 5 '18 at 0:23










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















11












$begingroup$

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









$endgroup$









  • 2




    $begingroup$
    +1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
    $endgroup$
    – Ethan Bolker
    Dec 4 '18 at 17:12



















7












$begingroup$

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









$endgroup$





















    2












    $begingroup$

    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.



    [Edit: Actually, I'm just about done with Morris's chapter on Metric Spaces, and I must say that, compared to the rest of the book so far, I'm not terribly impressed. Admittedly, he does say that MS theory is its own field separate from topology, so that make the lack of clarity a little forgivable. Still, it's annoying to have the hypotheses and specific definitions in theorems/corollaries and problems not clearly stated; maybe it's just me, but this seems to be a real difficulty in section 6.5 on the Baire Category Theorem. Anyway, I think I'm just going to skip the rest of this chapter and move on with the book.]



    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











    $endgroup$









    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
      $endgroup$
      – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
      Dec 4 '18 at 19:44



















    1












    $begingroup$

    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









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      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.
      $endgroup$
      – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
      Dec 4 '18 at 19:57






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      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."
      $endgroup$
      – zoidberg
      Dec 4 '18 at 20:16











    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',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    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
    });


    }
    });














    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









    11












    $begingroup$

    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









    $endgroup$









    • 2




      $begingroup$
      +1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
      $endgroup$
      – Ethan Bolker
      Dec 4 '18 at 17:12
















    11












    $begingroup$

    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









    $endgroup$









    • 2




      $begingroup$
      +1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
      $endgroup$
      – Ethan Bolker
      Dec 4 '18 at 17:12














    11












    11








    11





    $begingroup$

    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









    $endgroup$



    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 Dec 4 '18 at 17:09









    GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會

    12.8k72445




    12.8k72445








    • 2




      $begingroup$
      +1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
      $endgroup$
      – Ethan Bolker
      Dec 4 '18 at 17:12














    • 2




      $begingroup$
      +1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
      $endgroup$
      – Ethan Bolker
      Dec 4 '18 at 17:12








    2




    2




    $begingroup$
    +1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
    $endgroup$
    – Ethan Bolker
    Dec 4 '18 at 17:12




    $begingroup$
    +1 for suggesting the reverse order. (I can't speak to the individual texts you recommend.)
    $endgroup$
    – Ethan Bolker
    Dec 4 '18 at 17:12











    7












    $begingroup$

    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









    $endgroup$


















      7












      $begingroup$

      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









      $endgroup$
















        7












        7








        7





        $begingroup$

        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









        $endgroup$



        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 Dec 4 '18 at 23:35









        Sheldon AxlerSheldon Axler

        3,576615




        3,576615























            2












            $begingroup$

            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.



            [Edit: Actually, I'm just about done with Morris's chapter on Metric Spaces, and I must say that, compared to the rest of the book so far, I'm not terribly impressed. Admittedly, he does say that MS theory is its own field separate from topology, so that make the lack of clarity a little forgivable. Still, it's annoying to have the hypotheses and specific definitions in theorems/corollaries and problems not clearly stated; maybe it's just me, but this seems to be a real difficulty in section 6.5 on the Baire Category Theorem. Anyway, I think I'm just going to skip the rest of this chapter and move on with the book.]



            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











            $endgroup$









            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
              $endgroup$
              – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
              Dec 4 '18 at 19:44
















            2












            $begingroup$

            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.



            [Edit: Actually, I'm just about done with Morris's chapter on Metric Spaces, and I must say that, compared to the rest of the book so far, I'm not terribly impressed. Admittedly, he does say that MS theory is its own field separate from topology, so that make the lack of clarity a little forgivable. Still, it's annoying to have the hypotheses and specific definitions in theorems/corollaries and problems not clearly stated; maybe it's just me, but this seems to be a real difficulty in section 6.5 on the Baire Category Theorem. Anyway, I think I'm just going to skip the rest of this chapter and move on with the book.]



            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











            $endgroup$









            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
              $endgroup$
              – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
              Dec 4 '18 at 19:44














            2












            2








            2





            $begingroup$

            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.



            [Edit: Actually, I'm just about done with Morris's chapter on Metric Spaces, and I must say that, compared to the rest of the book so far, I'm not terribly impressed. Admittedly, he does say that MS theory is its own field separate from topology, so that make the lack of clarity a little forgivable. Still, it's annoying to have the hypotheses and specific definitions in theorems/corollaries and problems not clearly stated; maybe it's just me, but this seems to be a real difficulty in section 6.5 on the Baire Category Theorem. Anyway, I think I'm just going to skip the rest of this chapter and move on with the book.]



            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











            $endgroup$



            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.



            [Edit: Actually, I'm just about done with Morris's chapter on Metric Spaces, and I must say that, compared to the rest of the book so far, I'm not terribly impressed. Admittedly, he does say that MS theory is its own field separate from topology, so that make the lack of clarity a little forgivable. Still, it's annoying to have the hypotheses and specific definitions in theorems/corollaries and problems not clearly stated; maybe it's just me, but this seems to be a real difficulty in section 6.5 on the Baire Category Theorem. Anyway, I think I'm just going to skip the rest of this chapter and move on with the book.]



            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








            edited Jan 14 at 4:22

























            answered Dec 4 '18 at 18:21









            Cassius12Cassius12

            13111




            13111








            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
              $endgroup$
              – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
              Dec 4 '18 at 19:44














            • 1




              $begingroup$
              Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
              $endgroup$
              – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
              Dec 4 '18 at 19:44








            1




            1




            $begingroup$
            Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
            $endgroup$
            – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
            Dec 4 '18 at 19:44




            $begingroup$
            Topology without Tears can be a soft introduction. Personally, I can't find another introductory topology book better than Munkres's Topology.
            $endgroup$
            – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
            Dec 4 '18 at 19:44











            1












            $begingroup$

            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









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              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.
              $endgroup$
              – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
              Dec 4 '18 at 19:57






            • 4




              $begingroup$
              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."
              $endgroup$
              – zoidberg
              Dec 4 '18 at 20:16
















            1












            $begingroup$

            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









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              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.
              $endgroup$
              – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
              Dec 4 '18 at 19:57






            • 4




              $begingroup$
              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."
              $endgroup$
              – zoidberg
              Dec 4 '18 at 20:16














            1












            1








            1





            $begingroup$

            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









            $endgroup$



            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












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Dec 4 '18 at 17:29









            zoidbergzoidberg

            1,065113




            1,065113












            • $begingroup$
              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.
              $endgroup$
              – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
              Dec 4 '18 at 19:57






            • 4




              $begingroup$
              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."
              $endgroup$
              – zoidberg
              Dec 4 '18 at 20:16


















            • $begingroup$
              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.
              $endgroup$
              – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
              Dec 4 '18 at 19:57






            • 4




              $begingroup$
              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."
              $endgroup$
              – zoidberg
              Dec 4 '18 at 20:16
















            $begingroup$
            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.
            $endgroup$
            – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
            Dec 4 '18 at 19:57




            $begingroup$
            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.
            $endgroup$
            – GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會
            Dec 4 '18 at 19:57




            4




            4




            $begingroup$
            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."
            $endgroup$
            – zoidberg
            Dec 4 '18 at 20:16




            $begingroup$
            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."
            $endgroup$
            – zoidberg
            Dec 4 '18 at 20:16


















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            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.




            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

            Plaza Victoria

            Image
            Plaza Victoria Plaza Victoria en 2017 Otros nombres Plaza de La Victoria Localización El Almendral, Valparaíso, Chile Vías adyacentes Chacabuco, Molina, Plaza Victoria y Edwards Creación 1841 Metro Bellavista Ubicación 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 Coordenadas: 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 [editar datos en Wikidata] La Plaza Victoria , también llamada Plaza de la Victoria , [ 1 ] ​ es una plaza ubicada en el sector El Almendral del plan de la ciudad de Valparaíso, Chile, de importancia patrimonial, que incluye valiosas estatuas y especies vegetales. [ 2 ] ​ La plaza se creó como tal en la primera mitad del siglo XIX, tomando previamente los nombres de Plaza Nueva y Plaza de Orrego . Si bien desde sus inicios tuvo relevancia histórica, no fue sino a partir de fines de los años 1860 cuando comenzó a cobrar mayor importancia y se convirtió en uno de los principales centros sociales de l...
            Read more

            Puebla de Zaragoza

            Image
            Para otros usos de este término, véase Puebla (desambiguación). Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localidad De arriba a abajo de izquierda a derecha: Estrella de Puebla, Volcán Popocatépetl, Catedral de Puebla, Monumento a Ignacio Zaragoza, Estadio Cuauhtémoc, Angelópolis y Vista panorámica de la ciudad. Escudo Otros nombres: El relicario de América/ La ciudad de los Ángeles/ La Angelópolis Lema: Muy noble y muy leal ciudad de Puebla de los Ángeles Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localización de Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza en México Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza Localización de Heroica Puebla de Zaragoza en Puebla Mapa interactivo Coordenadas 19°03′05″N 98°13′04″O  /  19.051388888889, -98.217777777778 Coordenadas: 19°03′05″N 98°13′04″O  /  19.051388888889, -98.217777777778 Idioma oficial Español Entidad Localidad  • País   México  • Estado Puebla  • Municipio Puebla Presidente municipal Claudia Rivera Vivanc...
            Read more

            Musa

            Image
            Para el género de plantas, véase Musa (planta). Apolo y la Nueve Musas En la mitología griega, las musas (en griego antiguo μοῦσαι « mousai» ) son, según los escritores más antiguos, las divinidades inspiradoras de las Artes: cada una de ellas está relacionada con ramas artísticas y del conocimiento. Son hijas de Zeus y de Mnemósine, compañeras del séquito de Apolo, dios olímpico de la música y patrón de las bellas artes, quien tuvo romances con cada una de ellas, dejando descendientes. Bajaban a la tierra a susurrar ideas e inspirar a aquellos mortales que las invocaran. En la época más arcaica eran las ninfas inspiradoras de las fuentes, en las cuales eran adoradas. Finalmente, alrededor de los siglos VIII-VII a. C. [ 1 ] ​ prevaleció en todo el territorio de la Hélade la adoración de las nueve Musas, que son Calíope, Clío, Erato, Euterpe, Melpómene, Polimnia, Talía, Terpsícore y Urania. El culto a las musas era originalmente de Tracia y Beocia, y fueron de vital impo...
            Read more