If I’m trying to predict the light entering my eyes, and there’s a brick wall six feet in front of me, it seems weird to me to say that the variables on the far side of the wall are being wiped out because the wall is “noisy” rather than, say, because the wall is “opaque”. Is there some technical sense in which the wall is “noisier” than the air?
Either satisfies your “equal conditional probability” criterion, so I don’t think it affects any of the math, but it seems like it could matter to understanding how this definition applies to the real world.
If I’m trying to predict the light entering my eyes, and there’s a brick wall six feet in front of me, it seems weird to me to say that the variables on the far side of the wall are being wiped out because the wall is “noisy” rather than, say, because the wall is “opaque”. Is there some technical sense in which the wall is “noisier” than the air?
Either satisfies your “equal conditional probability” criterion, so I don’t think it affects any of the math, but it seems like it could matter to understanding how this definition applies to the real world.