Why do we call it Bayes' theorem?
$begingroup$
I'm not a historian, nor would I claim to be one, but I've seen a lot of people say that it was Laplace who formalized the theorem:
$$P(A|B)=frac{P(B|A)P(A)}{P(B)}$$
Why don't we call it "Laplace's Theorem"?
Is there a technical or serious reason for continuing to give Bayes the credit?
I don't mean to be obstinate in asking this question, I'm honestly curious if there is a technical or serious answer to the question outside "Bayes was the first to come to the idea".
probability math-history
asked Jan 1 at 16:59
jake mckenziejake mckenzie
218110
$endgroup$
|
show 13 more comments
$begingroup$
I'm not a historian, nor would I claim to be one, but I've seen a lot of people say that it was Laplace who formalized the theorem:
$$P(A|B)=frac{P(B|A)P(A)}{P(B)}$$
Why don't we call it "Laplace's Theorem"?
Is there a technical or serious reason for continuing to give Bayes the credit?
I don't mean to be obstinate in asking this question, I'm honestly curious if there is a technical or serious answer to the question outside "Bayes was the first to come to the idea".
probability math-history
asked Jan 1 at 16:59
jake mckenziejake mckenzie
218110
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Perhaps for the same reason that many people call it Burnsides Lemma instead of "The Lemma that is not Burnside's." I'm not at home and so don't have access to my history books at the moment, but wikipedia seems to suggest a different story than what you suggest.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Jan 1 at 17:04
2
$begingroup$
While we're at it, Stirling's formula shoud be called the De Moivre-Stirling formula.
$endgroup$
– zhw.
Jan 1 at 17:05
4
$begingroup$
By french wikipedia, Laplace rediscovered the formula in 1774 (i.e. without knowing that it has been discovered by Bayes previously), whereas Bayes discovered it before 1761.
$endgroup$
– Surb
Jan 1 at 17:06
1
$begingroup$
Although it is relatively rare as far as I know, there are occasions when the name associated with something is not necessarily that of the first person to discover it. For example, with Gilbreath's conjecture, "In 1878, eighty years before Gilbreath's discovery, François Proth had, however, published the same observations along with an attempted proof, which was later shown to be false". I don't know why it's not called Proth's conjecture instead. However, I believe this happens generally more rarely with theorems.
$endgroup$
– John Omielan
Jan 1 at 17:12
2
$begingroup$
Stigler's law of eponymy states that no scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer. (Note that Stigler's law was originally discovered by Robert Merton.)
$endgroup$
– littleO
Jan 1 at 17:23
|
show 13 more comments
$begingroup$
I'm not a historian, nor would I claim to be one, but I've seen a lot of people say that it was Laplace who formalized the theorem:
$$P(A|B)=frac{P(B|A)P(A)}{P(B)}$$
Why don't we call it "Laplace's Theorem"?
Is there a technical or serious reason for continuing to give Bayes the credit?
I don't mean to be obstinate in asking this question, I'm honestly curious if there is a technical or serious answer to the question outside "Bayes was the first to come to the idea".
probability math-history
asked Jan 1 at 16:59
jake mckenziejake mckenzie
218110
$endgroup$
I'm not a historian, nor would I claim to be one, but I've seen a lot of people say that it was Laplace who formalized the theorem:
$$P(A|B)=frac{P(B|A)P(A)}{P(B)}$$
Why don't we call it "Laplace's Theorem"?
Is there a technical or serious reason for continuing to give Bayes the credit?
I don't mean to be obstinate in asking this question, I'm honestly curious if there is a technical or serious answer to the question outside "Bayes was the first to come to the idea".
probability math-history
probability math-history
asked Jan 1 at 16:59
jake mckenziejake mckenzie
218110
asked Jan 1 at 16:59
jake mckenziejake mckenzie
218110
edited Jan 1 at 17:12
jake mckenzie
asked Jan 1 at 16:59
jake mckenziejake mckenzie
218110
asked Jan 1 at 16:59
jake mckenziejake mckenzie
218110
asked Jan 1 at 16:59
jake mckenziejake mckenzie
218110
218110
1
$begingroup$
Perhaps for the same reason that many people call it Burnsides Lemma instead of "The Lemma that is not Burnside's." I'm not at home and so don't have access to my history books at the moment, but wikipedia seems to suggest a different story than what you suggest.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Jan 1 at 17:04
2
$begingroup$
While we're at it, Stirling's formula shoud be called the De Moivre-Stirling formula.
$endgroup$
– zhw.
Jan 1 at 17:05
4
$begingroup$
By french wikipedia, Laplace rediscovered the formula in 1774 (i.e. without knowing that it has been discovered by Bayes previously), whereas Bayes discovered it before 1761.
$endgroup$
– Surb
Jan 1 at 17:06
1
$begingroup$
Although it is relatively rare as far as I know, there are occasions when the name associated with something is not necessarily that of the first person to discover it. For example, with Gilbreath's conjecture, "In 1878, eighty years before Gilbreath's discovery, François Proth had, however, published the same observations along with an attempted proof, which was later shown to be false". I don't know why it's not called Proth's conjecture instead. However, I believe this happens generally more rarely with theorems.
$endgroup$
– John Omielan
Jan 1 at 17:12
2
$begingroup$
Stigler's law of eponymy states that no scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer. (Note that Stigler's law was originally discovered by Robert Merton.)
$endgroup$
– littleO
Jan 1 at 17:23
|
show 13 more comments
1
$begingroup$
Perhaps for the same reason that many people call it Burnsides Lemma instead of "The Lemma that is not Burnside's." I'm not at home and so don't have access to my history books at the moment, but wikipedia seems to suggest a different story than what you suggest.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Jan 1 at 17:04
2
$begingroup$
While we're at it, Stirling's formula shoud be called the De Moivre-Stirling formula.
$endgroup$
– zhw.
Jan 1 at 17:05
4
$begingroup$
By french wikipedia, Laplace rediscovered the formula in 1774 (i.e. without knowing that it has been discovered by Bayes previously), whereas Bayes discovered it before 1761.
$endgroup$
– Surb
Jan 1 at 17:06
1
$begingroup$
Although it is relatively rare as far as I know, there are occasions when the name associated with something is not necessarily that of the first person to discover it. For example, with Gilbreath's conjecture, "In 1878, eighty years before Gilbreath's discovery, François Proth had, however, published the same observations along with an attempted proof, which was later shown to be false". I don't know why it's not called Proth's conjecture instead. However, I believe this happens generally more rarely with theorems.
$endgroup$
– John Omielan
Jan 1 at 17:12
2
$begingroup$
Stigler's law of eponymy states that no scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer. (Note that Stigler's law was originally discovered by Robert Merton.)
$endgroup$
– littleO
Jan 1 at 17:23
1
1
$begingroup$
Perhaps for the same reason that many people call it Burnsides Lemma instead of "The Lemma that is not Burnside's." I'm not at home and so don't have access to my history books at the moment, but wikipedia seems to suggest a different story than what you suggest.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Jan 1 at 17:04
$begingroup$
Perhaps for the same reason that many people call it Burnsides Lemma instead of "The Lemma that is not Burnside's." I'm not at home and so don't have access to my history books at the moment, but wikipedia seems to suggest a different story than what you suggest.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Jan 1 at 17:04
2
2
$begingroup$
While we're at it, Stirling's formula shoud be called the De Moivre-Stirling formula.
$endgroup$
– zhw.
Jan 1 at 17:05
$begingroup$
While we're at it, Stirling's formula shoud be called the De Moivre-Stirling formula.
$endgroup$
– zhw.
Jan 1 at 17:05
4
4
$begingroup$
By french wikipedia, Laplace rediscovered the formula in 1774 (i.e. without knowing that it has been discovered by Bayes previously), whereas Bayes discovered it before 1761.
$endgroup$
– Surb
Jan 1 at 17:06
$begingroup$
By french wikipedia, Laplace rediscovered the formula in 1774 (i.e. without knowing that it has been discovered by Bayes previously), whereas Bayes discovered it before 1761.
$endgroup$
– Surb
Jan 1 at 17:06
1
1
$begingroup$
Although it is relatively rare as far as I know, there are occasions when the name associated with something is not necessarily that of the first person to discover it. For example, with Gilbreath's conjecture, "In 1878, eighty years before Gilbreath's discovery, François Proth had, however, published the same observations along with an attempted proof, which was later shown to be false". I don't know why it's not called Proth's conjecture instead. However, I believe this happens generally more rarely with theorems.
$endgroup$
– John Omielan
Jan 1 at 17:12
$begingroup$
Although it is relatively rare as far as I know, there are occasions when the name associated with something is not necessarily that of the first person to discover it. For example, with Gilbreath's conjecture, "In 1878, eighty years before Gilbreath's discovery, François Proth had, however, published the same observations along with an attempted proof, which was later shown to be false". I don't know why it's not called Proth's conjecture instead. However, I believe this happens generally more rarely with theorems.
$endgroup$
– John Omielan
Jan 1 at 17:12
2
2
$begingroup$
Stigler's law of eponymy states that no scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer. (Note that Stigler's law was originally discovered by Robert Merton.)
$endgroup$
– littleO
Jan 1 at 17:23
$begingroup$
Stigler's law of eponymy states that no scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer. (Note that Stigler's law was originally discovered by Robert Merton.)
$endgroup$
– littleO
Jan 1 at 17:23
|
show 13 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Thomas Bayes died in 1761, and his "Bayes Theorem" was published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London in 1763 after his death.
Indeed, Laplace first wrote down the general formula, but it was Thomas Bayes who first derived the special case of Laplace's general formula. One of the reasons why it is called Bayes Theorem might be that Laplace genuinely acknowledged Bayes's important contribution.
Here is what Laplace wrote:
"Bayes, in the Transactions Philosophiques of the Year 1763, sought directly the probability that the possibilities indicated by past experiences are comprised within given limits; and he has arrived at this in a refined and very ingenious manner, although a little perplexing."
Information from Bayes, Laplace and Bayes’ Theorem
answered Jan 1 at 17:29
LarryLarry
2,53031131
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
This is a good answer and mostly what I was looking for in asking the question. This is the first instance I've read that Laplace had any knowledge of Bayes' work. Thank you.
$endgroup$
– jake mckenzie
Jan 1 at 17:44
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3058655%2fwhy-do-we-call-it-bayes-theorem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Thomas Bayes died in 1761, and his "Bayes Theorem" was published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London in 1763 after his death.
Indeed, Laplace first wrote down the general formula, but it was Thomas Bayes who first derived the special case of Laplace's general formula. One of the reasons why it is called Bayes Theorem might be that Laplace genuinely acknowledged Bayes's important contribution.
Here is what Laplace wrote:
"Bayes, in the Transactions Philosophiques of the Year 1763, sought directly the probability that the possibilities indicated by past experiences are comprised within given limits; and he has arrived at this in a refined and very ingenious manner, although a little perplexing."
Information from Bayes, Laplace and Bayes’ Theorem
answered Jan 1 at 17:29
LarryLarry
2,53031131
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
This is a good answer and mostly what I was looking for in asking the question. This is the first instance I've read that Laplace had any knowledge of Bayes' work. Thank you.
$endgroup$
– jake mckenzie
Jan 1 at 17:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thomas Bayes died in 1761, and his "Bayes Theorem" was published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London in 1763 after his death.
Indeed, Laplace first wrote down the general formula, but it was Thomas Bayes who first derived the special case of Laplace's general formula. One of the reasons why it is called Bayes Theorem might be that Laplace genuinely acknowledged Bayes's important contribution.
Here is what Laplace wrote:
"Bayes, in the Transactions Philosophiques of the Year 1763, sought directly the probability that the possibilities indicated by past experiences are comprised within given limits; and he has arrived at this in a refined and very ingenious manner, although a little perplexing."
Information from Bayes, Laplace and Bayes’ Theorem
answered Jan 1 at 17:29
LarryLarry
2,53031131
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
This is a good answer and mostly what I was looking for in asking the question. This is the first instance I've read that Laplace had any knowledge of Bayes' work. Thank you.
$endgroup$
– jake mckenzie
Jan 1 at 17:44
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thomas Bayes died in 1761, and his "Bayes Theorem" was published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London in 1763 after his death.
Indeed, Laplace first wrote down the general formula, but it was Thomas Bayes who first derived the special case of Laplace's general formula. One of the reasons why it is called Bayes Theorem might be that Laplace genuinely acknowledged Bayes's important contribution.
Here is what Laplace wrote:
"Bayes, in the Transactions Philosophiques of the Year 1763, sought directly the probability that the possibilities indicated by past experiences are comprised within given limits; and he has arrived at this in a refined and very ingenious manner, although a little perplexing."
Information from Bayes, Laplace and Bayes’ Theorem
answered Jan 1 at 17:29
LarryLarry
2,53031131
$endgroup$
Thomas Bayes died in 1761, and his "Bayes Theorem" was published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London in 1763 after his death.
Indeed, Laplace first wrote down the general formula, but it was Thomas Bayes who first derived the special case of Laplace's general formula. One of the reasons why it is called Bayes Theorem might be that Laplace genuinely acknowledged Bayes's important contribution.
Here is what Laplace wrote:
"Bayes, in the Transactions Philosophiques of the Year 1763, sought directly the probability that the possibilities indicated by past experiences are comprised within given limits; and he has arrived at this in a refined and very ingenious manner, although a little perplexing."
Information from Bayes, Laplace and Bayes’ Theorem
answered Jan 1 at 17:29
LarryLarry
2,53031131
answered Jan 1 at 17:29
LarryLarry
2,53031131
answered Jan 1 at 17:29
LarryLarry
2,53031131
answered Jan 1 at 17:29
LarryLarry
2,53031131
2,53031131
1
$begingroup$
This is a good answer and mostly what I was looking for in asking the question. This is the first instance I've read that Laplace had any knowledge of Bayes' work. Thank you.
$endgroup$
– jake mckenzie
Jan 1 at 17:44
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
This is a good answer and mostly what I was looking for in asking the question. This is the first instance I've read that Laplace had any knowledge of Bayes' work. Thank you.
$endgroup$
– jake mckenzie
Jan 1 at 17:44
1
1
$begingroup$
This is a good answer and mostly what I was looking for in asking the question. This is the first instance I've read that Laplace had any knowledge of Bayes' work. Thank you.
$endgroup$
– jake mckenzie
Jan 1 at 17:44
$begingroup$
This is a good answer and mostly what I was looking for in asking the question. This is the first instance I've read that Laplace had any knowledge of Bayes' work. Thank you.
$endgroup$
– jake mckenzie
Jan 1 at 17:44
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3058655%2fwhy-do-we-call-it-bayes-theorem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
1
$begingroup$
Perhaps for the same reason that many people call it Burnsides Lemma instead of "The Lemma that is not Burnside's." I'm not at home and so don't have access to my history books at the moment, but wikipedia seems to suggest a different story than what you suggest.
$endgroup$
– JMoravitz
Jan 1 at 17:04
2
$begingroup$
While we're at it, Stirling's formula shoud be called the De Moivre-Stirling formula.
$endgroup$
– zhw.
Jan 1 at 17:05
4
$begingroup$
By french wikipedia, Laplace rediscovered the formula in 1774 (i.e. without knowing that it has been discovered by Bayes previously), whereas Bayes discovered it before 1761.
$endgroup$
– Surb
Jan 1 at 17:06
1
$begingroup$
Although it is relatively rare as far as I know, there are occasions when the name associated with something is not necessarily that of the first person to discover it. For example, with Gilbreath's conjecture, "In 1878, eighty years before Gilbreath's discovery, François Proth had, however, published the same observations along with an attempted proof, which was later shown to be false". I don't know why it's not called Proth's conjecture instead. However, I believe this happens generally more rarely with theorems.
$endgroup$
– John Omielan
Jan 1 at 17:12
2
$begingroup$
Stigler's law of eponymy states that no scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer. (Note that Stigler's law was originally discovered by Robert Merton.)
$endgroup$
– littleO
Jan 1 at 17:23