“Or perhaps it’s because the details let us see how the event could happen. I would give a lower probability to P=NP than to (P=NP and [proof of P=NP that I went over rigorously] works). In this case, we should think about how events could happen before assigning them a probability.”
I believe what you really meant to say was that you expect
Otherwise (as I’m sure you know), this breaks the conjunction rule. This tweak retains your argument without breaking probability: more information may increase your assignment of probabilities.
I believe what you really meant to say was that you expect
Otherwise (as I’m sure you know), this breaks the conjunction rule. This tweak retains your argument without breaking probability: more information may increase your assignment of probabilities.