Bertrand's Paradox: Is There More to it?

  • Thread starter pzona
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Paradox
In summary, Bertrand's Paradox, also known as Russell's Paradox, highlights the issues with naive set theory and the concept of extraordinary sets. This paradox extends to other areas of thought, and one example is the "set of all ideas" which includes itself. To address this, class theory proposes a hierarchy of classes instead of sets. While sets provide a basis for all disciplines, Russell's Paradox does not play a significant role in most disciplines.
  • #1
pzona
234
0
I've been reading a little bit into mathematical paradoxes lately, and I'm not sure what to make of Bertrand's paradox (regarding the extraordinary set R). I understand the proof, but does this paradox extend to other areas of thought (on that note, this question might belong in the philosophy section)? One example of an extraordinary set given in the text I was reading was the "idea" of a set that includes all ideas. Is this truly an extraordinary set?

EDIT: I meant to title this "Bertrand's Paradox" but I hit enter instead of the apostrophe. Sorry for the typo, feel free to change it.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2


It essentially shows that "naive set theory", in which a set exists as long as it is possible to give a rule by which anything can be determined to be in or not in the set, has problems. If you are willing to identify the "idea" of a set with the set itself, then the "set of all ideas" would include itself and so is an "extraordinary set". One attempt to get around that is "class theory" in which one "set" is not allowed to contain another set. Instead you get a "hierarchy" of classes with ordinary sets of non-set objects are at the lowest rung and each level can contain classes at a lower level.

Certainly, any discipline can be expressed in terms of sets and so set, in that sense, form a basis for all disciplines. I think, however, it would be a stretch to assert that Russel's paradox ("Bertrand" is Bertrand Russel's first name and ideas, theorems, paradoxes, etc. are not normally labeled by first names!) plays any important role in most disciplines.
 
  • #3


HallsofIvy talked about Russell's Paradox. (Promulgated by Bertrand Russell.)
However, the question was Bertrand's Paradox. (Promulgated by Joseph Bertrand.)
For all I know, there is a Joseph's Paradox as well, but that also was not the question.

Bertrand's Paradox:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand's_paradox
 
  • #4


That was my fault, I meant Russell's Paradox. No idea why I used his first name, I guess I wasn't thinking, but I was definitely talking about the problem involving set theory. Thanks for the answer, HallsofIvy, I haven't read much (anything) about class theory, but it seems interesting, I'll have to read up a little more on it. Seems like it may get me back into programming...
 
  • #5


g_edgar said:
HallsofIvy talked about Russell's Paradox. (Promulgated by Bertrand Russell.)
However, the question was Bertrand's Paradox. (Promulgated by Joseph Bertrand.)
For all I know, there is a Joseph's Paradox as well, but that also was not the question.
Bertrand, Russel, Joseph? Oh, I'm so confused!:blushing:

 

FAQ: Bertrand's Paradox: Is There More to it?

What is Bertrand's Paradox?

Bertrand's Paradox is a mathematical paradox first introduced by French mathematician Joseph Bertrand in 1889. It deals with the probability of selecting a random chord on a circle and has implications for the concept of probability and the principle of indifference.

How does Bertrand's Paradox challenge the principle of indifference?

The principle of indifference states that if there are n possible outcomes and no reason to believe that one is more likely than the others, then each outcome has a probability of 1/n. Bertrand's Paradox challenges this by showing that depending on how the problem is interpreted, there can be different probabilities assigned to the same outcome.

What are the three interpretations of Bertrand's Paradox?

The three interpretations of Bertrand's Paradox are the random chord length, random central angle, and random point on the circumference. Each interpretation leads to a different probability for selecting a chord that is longer than the side of an inscribed equilateral triangle.

What is the solution to Bertrand's Paradox?

The solution to Bertrand's Paradox is that the principle of indifference is not always applicable and that the choice of interpretation can greatly affect the probabilities assigned. In order to avoid this paradox, additional information or constraints must be provided to determine the probabilities more accurately.

How is Bertrand's Paradox relevant in modern science?

Bertrand's Paradox highlights the importance of carefully defining and interpreting probabilities, especially in situations where the principle of indifference may not apply. In fields such as statistics, economics, and game theory, this paradox serves as a reminder to critically evaluate the assumptions and interpretations made when dealing with probabilities.

Similar threads

Back
Top