Received: from mail-qc0-f189.google.com ([209.85.216.189]:53216)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <lojban+bncCMGclZyxExDt0Zz_BBoEZeWJEg@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1Sio7w-0000WS-3C; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 07:49:25 -0700
Received: by qcsq5 with SMTP id q5sf3791996qcs.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 07:49:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=beta;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender
         :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list
         :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender
         :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type;
        bh=sA2/OtPRJ3jAiYHM60hDqeX46XVoF9UUNGSnD28gjWk=;
        b=m1UHXJAaFN3Qh6zwj0PN3mskm4e1pV8I8XSlotXBQ+ZqZv7URQlivuJtupSbYbKJDF
         LDQVln6o5h4WwIMDKmD9YbkUrUfpHg+U0vrXfDcgi3C4215Jyyoq8cJu/wsaUgi/He0j
         T4pE4oMeOa/UhwEqPqsVKyD7tU6vTeqLFucxA=
Received: by 10.236.145.70 with SMTP id o46mr934733yhj.1.1340549357624;
        Sun, 24 Jun 2012 07:49:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.236.121.148 with SMTP id r20ls4777700yhh.1.gmail; Sun, 24 Jun
 2012 07:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.157.1 with SMTP id n1mr16427587yhk.1.1340549356131;
        Sun, 24 Jun 2012 07:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.157.1 with SMTP id n1mr16427584yhk.1.1340549356089;
        Sun, 24 Jun 2012 07:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gh0-f182.google.com (mail-gh0-f182.google.com [209.85.160.182])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e37si6987482yhi.1.2012.06.24.07.49.16
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sun, 24 Jun 2012 07:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of escaaape@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.182 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.160.182;
Received: by ghbz22 with SMTP id z22so2725606ghb.13
        for <lojban@googlegroups.com>; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 07:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.236.71 with SMTP id us7mr5994028igc.16.1340549355867; Sun,
 24 Jun 2012 07:49:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.15.74 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 07:49:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAMKwHj2yw0qDh8gJD3g6WNfp+sNtbp4AKEmqO+bTqw3=57rSAQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGO2uOPcMjNogyRO8Wi-v+swm60xLR8X21=aykzmcMOh51e0-g@mail.gmail.com>
	<eddd7913-ac3b-4ec2-a72b-9f199852776b@googlegroups.com>
	<CAGO2uONMoF1BfuR+wJNn7y9ecjKg8PTeNHOp8J03JGAwmp5bnQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<74243394-F7AA-46CD-B731-21E95827CE6B@yahoo.com>
	<CAGO2uOMAatDoKcdk+1ti46mQ5fudXtPUTL3R1pHgUZ-LODrB6Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMKwHj1VjKh3wPefa3gqbQz39VDA=aFT1zgVT4s-8Lbz_z__eA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGO2uONCqnvYm89YOhuVPxydRfrZazJrwDDe3B6YcVuTjvvnXA@mail.gmail.com>
	<5fbb3fd1-8c00-42a4-9dac-e9889e69757f@googlegroups.com>
	<CAGO2uOO0aMRZCC_p4ijBtyJRnCbsuB45UNDvvDs_dTe=SxdTEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<000eea56-0a1e-4f54-8862-3cc817d539e1@googlegroups.com>
	<CAGO2uOPXNqkxWY3yDWEUWdDaTTGmjq_w=720JwHiVHswkaifnw@mail.gmail.com>
	<9cb9e4c0-f3fa-4183-8582-f14de670148c@googlegroups.com>
	<CAGO2uOPfj=uf4B1UcryaRuzmdnHsvuOZgs_BK5k=XnjK+HydyQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPAJj9KfOatTP8LyTcGZsCamCuWoduTwgLWmpqP9m5VnxYVbBg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGO2uOPVAeDeOdBZWnzb2Y07xmv=XuwYeAVwk5ZgPD3foMaSEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPAJj9KAU5w7VsUpt1mRkm+bA9kFLeBubjnF0BRTqtdHRSRpkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGO2uOPMOg6roW-ifgkOca=Zy4W84-eR_K-qQcT0s1xcB3ZgkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMKwHj183FZTuqyS8m_gHXfmfvQjSuv4u4wJiMBHjuHKOdUObw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGO2uOPGr8r5c1t=VNb3cT59DShVBh6MWgcrHrL_5pXRL5D_9A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMKwHj1=dRGjW6J8zQLG1Rgt2XwZ7sQx8eV5g6n3X1gJLx9HnQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGO2uOOwti2kUiL9aCX8tNn6Zr3v=nAw05zM6utLn20oWHg7Tw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMKwHj3ynW-yEMJFaqnw0JXd6+5a+hM1vAogg_CoU078oPToyQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGO2uOM=s_W32Np-NYW7WSGawR96K5JXVCqgeK5hbu2QNzB9Nw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMKwHj1=42g+ubU+DBsqz3cKc+OZLHhG7nfmX9o1dCYqt+VTKw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGO2uOPhxRB3ULO-FR7ZjgotoiWs5qGViGML_CYr7mUdrcE2Gg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMKwHj3aKi-i1ctjZ1ds1tinSFgzLxCzobxAyiRzrjOqBmpowg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGO2uOOGsUZvsNF5od4cfxeo8FX2-4ELApaSCFkUKt4uNY_Lfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMKwHj2yw0qDh8gJD3g6WNfp+sNtbp4AKEmqO+bTqw3=57rSAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 16:49:15 +0200
Message-ID: <CAGO2uOPbEP=xHEbiVqKtV=MtFipdeTuYeChJyaFOeCk8Nzcv7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Are Natlang the best case for entropy in
 communication ?
From: Escape Landsome <escaaape@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Sender: escaaape@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of escaaape@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.182 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=escaaape@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <lojban.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en_US>
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:lojban+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:googlegroups-manage+1004133512417+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /

> EVIDENCE is date gathered from experiments designed to support or refute a
> hypothesis.

* In hard science like Mathematics or Physics, yes, but those do not
have the monopoly of scientificity, and Linguistics being a much more
"human social science", accepts scientific argument in a more laxist
way.

In social sciences, probability is accepted under the subjective form
it has, concurrently to objective measurement it has too (if you go
read the articles on Probability theory in Wikipedia or Britannica,
you'll see the foundations of probability theory accepts both
interpretation of probability, and it is still discussed which one is
the true one)

* So, first, in the case of Example 2, since the utterance says how
many people there are, and it is impossible to tell outside of the
utterance, there is equiprobability, and this is proved.  Thus
S(Example 2) = -5*(0.2)*log_2(0.2) = 2.32 is *PROVED*

If you are not convinced, or if you look for a qualitative reasoning
that confirms it, think that there are thus 5 equiprobable
possibilities, so you need to code {a,e,i,o,u} in binary digits, and
you need a little more than 2 bits for that, 2.32 is then the good
result.

* For the Example 1, "bouche" is highly probable, and the 6 others
highly strange.   Let P be the probability of the "probable event",
that is "X = b in bouche".

Then S(Example 1) is -P.log_2(P) + other terms

where other terms is between P.log_2(1-P) and (P/6).log_2((1-P)/6) [as
can be proved mathematically]

The value of P should be computed from a corpus, but without that we
can bound it by minoration and it is certainly > 0.8, so, do the
calculations, and you'll see this holds.

* Anyway, you want something else, that nobody can give you at the
present, that is (unnecessary) precise studies, and even then, I bet
you won't be convinced.   What would convince a believer ?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.