I am taking a statistics class this term, and this is really my first taste of the subject. We were given the following definition:
Let $f_n(A)$ be the relative frequency of some random event $A$ occurring over $n$ trials. Then if $A$ occurred $0\leq m \leq n$ times: $f_n(A) = \frac{m}{n}$. After repeated trials we will find that each time $f_n(A) \approx p$ for some number $p\in[0,1]$.
We call this the frequentest definition of probability, and really it says that the odds of a random event $A$ occuring is that number $p$. So naturally I think well then we must have:
$$ p = \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} f_n(A) $$
However, after more careful thought this cannot be true. Since for a sequence $f_n$ to be convergent we would need for any $\epsilon > 0$ there to exist some $N\in\mathbb{N}$ such that if $n\geq N$ we have: $\left|f_n-p\right| \leq \epsilon$. But since $A$ is a random event we cannot conclude that after so many trials we won't get just a sequence of other events from the sample space that make it look like $p$ is a different value.
So how do we come up with a rigorous definition of the probability of a random event? Any suggested readings would be greately appreciated.