Jaynes' Solution Using The "maximum Ignorance" Principle
In his 1973 paper The Well-Posed Problem, Edwin Jaynes proposed a solution to Bertrand's paradox, based on the principle of "maximum ignorance"—that we should not use any information that is not given in the statement of the problem. Jaynes pointed out that Bertrand's problem does not specify the position or size of the circle, and argued that therefore any definite and objective solution must be "indifferent" to size and position. In other words: the solution must be both scale invariant and translation invariant.
To illustrate: assume that chords are laid at random onto a circle with a diameter of 2, for example by throwing straws onto it from far away. Now another circle with a smaller diameter (e.g., 1.1) is laid into the larger circle. Then the distribution of the chords on that smaller circle needs to be the same as on the larger circle. If the smaller circle is moved around within the larger circle, the probability must not change either. It can be seen very easily that there would be a change for method 3: the chord distribution on the small red circle looks qualitatively different from the distribution on the large circle:
The same occurs for method 1, though it is harder to see in a graphical representation. Method 2 is the only one that is both scale invariant and translation invariant; method 3 is just scale invariant, method 1 is neither.
However, Jaynes did not just use invariances to accept or reject given methods: this would leave the possibility that there is another not yet described method that would meet his common-sense criteria. Jaynes used the integral equations describing the invariances to directly determine the probability distribution. In this problem, the integral equations indeed have a unique solution, and it is precisely what was called "method 2" above, the random radius method.
Read more about this topic: Bertrand Paradox (probability)
Famous quotes containing the words solution, maximum, ignorance and/or principle:
“Give a scientist a problem and he will probably provide a solution; historians and sociologists, by contrast, can offer only opinions. Ask a dozen chemists the composition of an organic compound such as methane, and within a short time all twelve will have come up with the same solution of CH4. Ask, however, a dozen economists or sociologists to provide policies to reduce unemployment or the level of crime and twelve widely differing opinions are likely to be offered.”
—Derek Gjertsen, British scientist, author. Science and Philosophy: Past and Present, ch. 3, Penguin (1989)
“Only at his maximum does an individual surpass all his derivative elements, and become purely himself. And most people never get there. In his own pure individuality a man surpasses his father and mother, and is utterly unknown to them.”
—D.H. (David Herbert)
“Knowledge has two extremes. The first is the pure natural ignorance in which all men find themselves at birth. The other extreme is that reached by great minds, who, having run through all that men can know, find they know nothing, and come back again to that same natural ignorance from which they set out; this is a learned ignorance which is conscious of itself.”
—Blaise Pascal (1623–1662)
“You may call a jay a bird. Well, so he is, in a measure—because he’s got feathers on him, and don’t belong to no church, perhaps; but otherwise he is just as much a human as you be. And I’ll tell you for why. A jay’s gifts and instincts, and feelings, and interests, cover the whole ground. A jay hasn’t got any more principle than a Congressman.”
—Mark Twain [Samuel Langhorne Clemens] (1835–1910)