 | | Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism —Guy Albertelli
|
| | | (...) I still think you are seeing patterns you find interesting. When I buy a lottery ticket I always get "1 2 3 4 5 6" The U.S. coast line appearing _exactly_ the same somewhere else is "as" unlikely as the 200 mile one you posit. (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Chaotic Systems... (was: Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism) —David Eaton
|
| | | | (...) And I'd argue that that's JUST as likely as any other combination of numbers, accepting that each lottery number is as equally likely to appear as the next. Hence, you're fine. (...) The difference is in the inherent behavior of the system. (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Chaotic Systems... (was: Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | (...) If the UK lottery usage is anything to go by, I would avoid those numbers. I am sure I am right in saying it is the most common combination selected. If/when you win, you will have to share it with a lot of other players! That said, the (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Chaotic Systems... (was: Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism) —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | (...) Actually, I honestly wonder whether they'd 'let' such a combination pass... I'm willing to bet that if they got the combination 1,2,3,4,5,6, that lots of people would insist that it was rigged, even if it didn't happen.... I dunno what they'd (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Chaotic Systems... (was: Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | (...) Almost all the draws in the UK are live. There are “independent adjudicators” present to confirm that there is no shenanigans underway – what these people’s skills are I do not know. I doubt that you could discount a draw due to the selection (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Chaotic Systems... (was: Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | For “sequential” read “consecutive” (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Chaotic Systems... (was: Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Well, definitely such a sequence is much less likely than a more "random looking" sequence. If you 6 numbers are the digits 1-9, there are only 4 such sequences compared to a total of 9!/3! sequences (if each digit can only occur once, 9^6 (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Probability: (Was: Re: Chaotic Systems...) —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | (...) Most definitely, but that's only because there are more non-sequential combinations. But any PARTICULAR non-sequential combination is just as likely, obviously... (...) And again, the same applies... given that it'll be sequential, the (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Probability: (Was: Re: Chaotic Systems...) —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | (...) I'd get rid of the 1/3 chance and take the 1/2. Regardless of the laws of probability, sods law still says I will not win! Scott A (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Probability: (Was: Re: Chaotic Systems...) —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | (...) Actually, the odds that it's in the OTHER door (the one you didn't pick) are now up to 2/3, not just 1/2! I remember that this question actually generated a couple debates from a magazine and several colleges who were disputing the probability (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Probability: (Was: Re: Chaotic Systems...) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | (...) Yea, one place it was a big deal in was Ask Marylyn (sp?) in Parade. There's several ways to analyze it and get to the 2/3 chance. The one I realized yesterday is the simplest (but perhaps not most intuitive) is to realize that by switching, (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Chaotic Systems... (was: Re: Problems with Christianity and Darwinism) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) I'm with Scott A. on this, while all patterns are equally likely (in a fair draw) to come up, if you want to maximize your expected result, choose patterns less likely to have been selected so you reduce the odds of splitting with someone (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
